From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2005-09-27 04:54:50
|
We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So we have a choice: 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. Thoughts welcome. C |
From: Brendan S. <Brendan@BrendanSimon.com> - 2005-09-27 06:00:20
|
I'd say go with both original size and smaller size if possible. Maybe something like: 1) Original size and compatible connectors for interfacing with existing expansion boards. 2) Original size with new connectors and features. 3) Half size with new connectors and features. Half size with new compatible connectors gets interesting. Do you have the 92 or 60 pins ??? Mounting holes on the half size board would also be interesting, especially for backward compatibility. I hope the new connectors will have EVERYTHING on them so you don't have to sandwhich. ie. all signals on one connector. Alternatively two connectors on the same side of the board. Cheers, Brendan. gum...@li... wrote: >Message: 2 >Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:54:07 -0700 >From: Craig Hughes <cr...@gu...> >To: Gumstix List <gum...@li...> >Subject: [Gumstix-users] Next gen gumstix question >Reply-To: gum...@li... > >We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the >motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're >getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them >which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- >callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel >interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash >will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So >we have a choice: > >1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) >2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to >current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and >all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > >Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin >connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG >instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to >replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep >the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept >sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. > >Thoughts welcome. > >C > > |
From: Frank <fra...@ya...> - 2005-09-27 05:01:28
|
Wow, half the size. I have am proposing a project based on the gumstix which might have quantities in the 1000's. What's the time frame... --- Craig Hughes <cr...@gu...> wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix > (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like > we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on > them > which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to > non- > callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get > Intel > interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and > flash > will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board > footprint. So > we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board > (like wifi) > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar > functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video > in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the > 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to > OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector > to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to > keep > the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that > concept > sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. > > Thoughts welcome. > > C > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App > Server. > Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv > or your very > own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: > http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com |
From: James S. <ja...@re...> - 2005-09-27 05:17:56
Attachments:
hardware-diagram.gif
|
Dear Craig: My needs are described by the attached. Please see www.nextwiresystems.com/nws.html for the application details. My earlier project is at http://www.readsay.com/pronounce.html Volumes are estimated in the 100,000s in the first year. That's all assuming that we can find someone to pay for industrialization. Sincerely, James |
From: David I S M. <da...@th...> - 2005-09-27 05:51:03
|
Craig Hughes wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them which > I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- callphone > people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel interested > maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash will be a *lot* > smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) I'd say keep the size, improve the mounting issues. Right now you can't mount boards without using paper shims and rubber bands to keep it solid. When connecting the 60 pin connector the other end waves in the breeze. If you also connect a 92 pin board then that is somewhat solid (not completely since the 92 pin sits on one edge of the board. I have 4 products (tens of thousands) that could work with the Gumstix but I can't/won't use it because of mounting issues. Add USB 2.0 on board vs 1.1 Add WiFi 802.11G on board. Add Dual CF on board Make a nice breakout board that has spots to drop in RS-232 level shifters with 0 resistance jumpers normally in place for 3.3 TTL level out. That same breakout board should have the complete interface for LCD and Touch screen I/O. Add some GPIO to the breakout board. Finally add a connector for a standard GSM/GPRS modem. I'll say it again since it's so important make the mounting solid. 4 corner screws, and a screw at each end of each connector so the connectors CAN'T come apart. Make the board and all breakout boards mounting holes line up so the entire stack can be solidly mounted. Make sure the reset switch can't be pressed by the boards flexing. Bring out the reset switch to the breakout board. Make all breakout boards dimensionally the same at least in one dimension either width or hight so mounting a stack in a case is easier to do. Have enough edge so that you could have an extrusion made that you could slide the boards into and have a tight mount that will not move. > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) Smaller is OK if you make good solid connection breakout boards with all above functionality. > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG instead > of client only), and then most likely a new connector to replace the > existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep the 92-pin and > add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept sucks worse than > just updating the 92-pin connector. > While this is nice, do the the mounting problems it's not worth worrying about. Fix the mounting problems first. Cheers, David > Thoughts welcome. > > C > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. > Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very > own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users -- David Mandala <davidm at them dot com> www.them.com/~davidm Public Key id: 45B2D952 Murphy TX, 75094 214.774-2569 H 972.693.4007 C |
From: Kirk M. <km...@ec...> - 2005-09-28 10:28:48
|
I'd second that - unless you can build a form factor with some better "bus" connects for the stacks. Surely its better to have an identical size board for WiFi to plug on top - but it does sound interesting to use the saved space for a CF connector as that's a very generic requirement... as is usb host ;-) Level converter idea is cool too - but I can imagine it would be a surface mount fix. Kirk >I have 4 products (tens of thousands) that could work with the Gumstix but >I can't/won't use it because of mounting issues. > >Add USB 2.0 on board vs 1.1 >Add WiFi 802.11G on board. >Add Dual CF on board > >Make a nice breakout board that has spots to drop in RS-232 level shifters >with 0 resistance jumpers normally in place for 3.3 TTL level out. That >same breakout board should have the complete interface for LCD and Touch >screen I/O. Add some GPIO to the breakout board. Finally add a connector >for a standard GSM/GPRS modem. > >I'll say it again since it's so important make the mounting solid. 4 >corner screws, and a screw at each end of each connector so the connectors >CAN'T come apart. > >Make the board and all breakout boards mounting holes line up so the >entire stack can be solidly mounted. > >Make sure the reset switch can't be pressed by the boards flexing. > >Bring out the reset switch to the breakout board. > >Make all breakout boards dimensionally the same at least in one dimension >either width or hight so mounting a stack in a case is easier to do. Have >enough edge so that you could have an extrusion made that you could slide >the boards into and have a tight mount that will not move. > >>2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to >>current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and >>all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > >Smaller is OK if you make good solid connection breakout boards with all >above functionality. > >>Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin >>connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG instead >>of client only), and then most likely a new connector to replace the >>existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep the 92-pin and >>add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept sucks worse than >>just updating the 92-pin connector. > >While this is nice, do the the mounting problems it's not worth worrying >about. Fix the mounting problems first. > >Cheers, > >David > >>Thoughts welcome. >>C >> >>------------------------------------------------------- >>SF.Net email is sponsored by: >>Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >>Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very >>own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php >>_______________________________________________ >>gumstix-users mailing list >>gum...@li... >>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > >-- >David Mandala <davidm at them dot com> >www.them.com/~davidm Public Key id: 45B2D952 >Murphy TX, 75094 214.774-2569 H 972.693.4007 C > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is sponsored by: >Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very >own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php >_______________________________________________ >gumstix-users mailing list >gum...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users - http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~km |
From: John D. <sv...@ot...> - 2005-09-27 09:13:33
Attachments:
smime.p7s
|
PXA27X are much more complex chips than the chips you are using right now. Even to bring all the peripherals out, you need huge connectors. I can understand that most people do not want to pay for peripherals that they do not use. But as I can understand, many Gumstix owners, are just at the evaluation stage. It was a big surprise for us, to have such a small, fully functional computer, that we are trying to figure out, where to use its power. One of the reasons that someone will use a fully-functional Linux computer, instead of a microcontroller, is to access all the libraries that Linux has. Mainly many people (including me) want to use the various networking functionalities, either wired or wireless, so to have a board, with lots of connectivity capabilities is positive. I would vote in favor of the large board, packed with all goodies, esp. everything that has to do with connectivity (WiFi, Ethernet, BlueTooth whatever you can fit on). Even make it a little bit larger. I would suggest to copy the size of memory DIMMs, and use the same edge connector. Want smaller? Use the size of the DIMMs found in notebooks (SO-DIMMs if I am correct). I do not know how many people have developed mass-quantities of products based on gumstix, that compatibility will mean something to them. I would suggest to design something from scratch, fixing things that did not go well in the previous design (stable connectors, lots of holes for screws, etc.). Then, you can always create a board/ribbon, that would convert the new pinout to an 60-pin connector of the old Gumstix. Do not let compatibility (my personal view) put weight on your feet at this moment. I would not be interested in a bare system, with a much smaller board, unless this system is well below $100. If this can get really cheap, then adding connectors, daughterboards over daughterboards, finally gets much more expensive. John. -----Original Message----- From: gum...@li... [mailto:gum...@li...] On Behalf Of Craig Hughes Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 7:54 AM To: Gumstix List Subject: [Gumstix-users] Next gen gumstix question We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So we have a choice: 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. Thoughts welcome. C ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ gumstix-users mailing list gum...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users |
From: N.E.Whiteford <N.E...@so...> - 2005-09-27 09:32:09
|
I think it depends how much the extra functionality adds to the cost, it would be nice to still have a $100 version. On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Craig Hughes wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them > which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- > callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel > interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash > will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So > we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep > the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept > sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. > > Thoughts welcome. > > C > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. > Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very > own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2005-09-27 10:25:20
|
We're still way far off knowing what the final pricing will be, but things look good for getting all the bonus functionality without increasing price -- at a ballpark guesstimate, based mainly on the price of the 4-5 expensive components on there (like the CPU, RAM, etc). C On Sep 27, 2005, at 2:31 AM, N.E.Whiteford wrote: > I think it depends how much the extra functionality adds to the > cost, it > would be nice to still have a $100 version. > |
From: <pas...@wa...> - 2005-09-27 10:43:02
|
Craig Hughes writes: > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. [...] Will DREQ<2:0> and DVAL<1:0> be available on the new bus connector ? This issue came up from people trying to interface cameras: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=12443609 http://www.gumstix.org/tikiwiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?forumId=2&comments_parentId=1077 I'd agree that most people will be happy with USB cameras, but USB 1.1 might be too slow for some applications. And exposing DMA signals would make the bus more valuable anyway. -- Pascal |
From: George F. <cha...@gm...> - 2005-09-27 11:26:10
|
The main reason I have for connecting cameras straight to the bus is reduced latency between getting the image and processing it. Most USB webcams I've seen on PC's have a half-second delay between whats happening in front of the camera and whats on the screen. Thats useless for driving robots at anything other than a snails pace. I'd favour the same size board with loads of goodies :) George. On 27/09/05, pas...@wa... <pas...@wa...> wr= ote: > Craig Hughes writes: > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > > replace the existing 92-pin connector. [...] > > Will DREQ<2:0> and DVAL<1:0> be available on the new bus connector ? > This issue came up from people trying to interface cameras: > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=3D12443609 > http://www.gumstix.org/tikiwiki/tiki-view_forum_thread.php?forumId=3D2&co= mments_parentId=3D1077 > > I'd agree that most people will be happy with USB cameras, > but USB 1.1 might be too slow for some applications. And > exposing DMA signals would make the bus more valuable anyway. > > -- Pascal > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. > Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your ver= y > own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: John L. <la...@ya...> - 2005-09-27 12:20:09
|
I would vote for option 1, with a 2+ vote for wifi and explain myself by way of analogy. Gumstix w/out network connectivity are like PCs before the Internet. They're interesting, can do cool things, particularly with realtime control, and interesting applications, but they're limited to the "power of 1". Adding wifi capability will increase the number of applications and power of those applications the way the Internet turned PCs into "must have devices" for every home, school, office, and coffee shop! Wifi on every board means that every gumstix application has access not only to it's own local connectivty (and interesting device characteristics) but also all the other devices and computing infrastructure connected to the wifi-lan, and given that wifi's are often bridges to the WWW, that's a lot of resource! The potential increase in value to gumstix applications is indescribably huge! (sorry if I'm waxing poetic ;^) So... I would vote for the form factor that allows built-in wifi ;^) Langley Craig Hughes wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them > which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- > callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel > interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash > will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So > we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep > the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept > sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. > > Thoughts welcome. > > C > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. > Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your > very > own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Adam E. <ada...@at...> - 2005-09-27 12:56:01
|
So would I. Adam On Sep 27, 2005, at 7:20 AM, John Langley wrote: > So... I would vote for the form factor that allows built-in wifi ;^) |
From: Dick D. <ras...@gm...> - 2005-09-27 12:59:41
|
On 27/09/05, John Langley <la...@ya...> wrote: > Wifi on every board means that every gumstix application has access not > only to it's own local connectivty (and interesting device > characteristics) but also all the other devices and computing > infrastructure connected to the wifi-lan, and given that wifi's are > often bridges to the WWW, that's a lot of resource! Yeah, but wifi really sucks power. I'm no fan of bluetooth [0], but you get more use from a battery that way. Plus wifi is very much a moving target these days. In an ideal world I'd like the base unit as dinky as possible, with plenty of add-on board options. [0] http://number9.hellooperator.net/articles/2005/08/25/pootooth-more-like -- Rasputin :: Jack of All Trades - Master of Nuns |
From: Florian L. <gu...@fl...> - 2005-09-27 13:09:06
|
On Tuesday 27 September 2005 14:20, John Langley wrote: > So... I would vote for the form factor that allows built-in wifi =A0;^) Just don't forget, that wifi is consuming much power. Small embedded device= s=20 like gumstix' should in theory connect themselves with bluetooth (potential= ly=20 to an internet gateway). Also: if there's usb-host, it should be *very* eas= y=20 to add external usb wifi. That said. I think small (cheap) wifi/usb-host gumstix' would be bestseller= s,=20 but many people still prefer smaller versions (I for myself use some gumsti= x'=20 for a robotics project, where wifi is definitely not needed). If Gumstix-corp has to decide which version comes out first, they should=20 concentrate on a small wifi/usb-host version first. btw: a cheap (maybe not even very small) usb-host version would be thrillin= g=20 (anything missing could still be added with usb-devices). // florian loitsch |
From: Kirk M. <km...@ec...> - 2005-09-28 10:39:02
|
yup - if WiFi was on board it would need a hard-disable option (sad) that's why a plug-on would be better. We'd use ZigBee or something like that as an add-on. Kirk At 14:08 27/09/2005, you wrote: >On Tuesday 27 September 2005 14:20, John Langley wrote: > > So... I would vote for the form factor that allows built-in wifi ;^) >Just don't forget, that wifi is consuming much power. Small embedded devices >like gumstix' should in theory connect themselves with bluetooth (potentially >to an internet gateway). Also: if there's usb-host, it should be *very* easy >to add external usb wifi. > >That said. I think small (cheap) wifi/usb-host gumstix' would be bestsellers, >but many people still prefer smaller versions (I for myself use some gumstix' >for a robotics project, where wifi is definitely not needed). > >If Gumstix-corp has to decide which version comes out first, they should >concentrate on a small wifi/usb-host version first. > >btw: a cheap (maybe not even very small) usb-host version would be thrilling >(anything missing could still be added with usb-devices). > >// florian loitsch > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is sponsored by: >Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very >own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php >_______________________________________________ >gumstix-users mailing list >gum...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users - http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~km |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2005-09-29 06:19:57
|
On Sep 28, 2005, at 3:37 AM, Kirk Martinez wrote: > yup - if WiFi was on board it would need a hard-disable option > (sad) that's why a plug-on would be better. We'd use ZigBee or > something like that as an add-on. Wifi would be an option like bluetooth. You'd be able to buy a board which didn't have the wifi stuff populated to reduce price and power requirements. C |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2005-09-29 12:50:11
|
Seems like the USB interfaced 802.11 devices are starting to work under linux. If a USB host is present, even if 12mbps, provides the option for wireless. David. --- Craig Hughes <cr...@gu...> wrote: > On Sep 28, 2005, at 3:37 AM, Kirk Martinez > wrote: > > > yup - if WiFi was on board it would need a > hard-disable option > > (sad) that's why a plug-on would be better. > We'd use ZigBee or > > something like that as an add-on. > > Wifi would be an option like bluetooth. You'd > be able to buy a board > which didn't have the wifi stuff populated to > reduce price and power > requirements. > > C > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Power Architecture Resource Center: Free > content, downloads, discussions, > and more. > http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Doug S. <do...@pr...> - 2005-09-29 13:02:20
|
David Farrell wrote: > Seems like the USB interfaced 802.11 devices are starting to work under linux. I've been using these for years on linux. -- Doug |
From: David F. <dav...@ya...> - 2005-09-27 12:56:32
|
. > > Thoughts welcome. > 1) Same size, usable mounting holes. 2) I believe SD interface on the 27X is 4 bits wide so its 12.5MB/sec fast, CF is a waste of pins. On board SD. 3) Switching supply for power. 4) One connector, one side. If more than one maybe a SIM edge like Kontron X-board. 5) Bluetooth module. With a "good" MMCX connector. 6) Status LED(s) 7) Real time clock. David. |
From: Kirk M. <km...@ec...> - 2005-09-28 10:37:18
|
At 13:56 27/09/2005, you wrote: Ah! RTC please - if that solves the standby/automatic timing of standby... I know our BitsyX has to have an RTC. This opens all the sensor network/logger applications market. Kirk >7) Real time clock. > >David. > > > >------------------------------------------------------- >SF.Net email is sponsored by: >Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very >own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php >_______________________________________________ >gumstix-users mailing list >gum...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users - http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~km |
From: Craig H. <cr...@gu...> - 2005-09-29 06:19:01
|
Well, there is an RTC on the current gumstix, it's just not battery- backed. You can turn on the 32.768kHz oscillator by using pxaregs to write "2" to the OSCC register. Even w/out the 32kHz clock ticking, there's still an RTC there, driven by the 3.6864MHz clock, divided by a default ratio of 112 (to give 32.914kHz). C On Sep 28, 2005, at 3:35 AM, Kirk Martinez wrote: > At 13:56 27/09/2005, you wrote: > Ah! RTC please - if that solves the standby/automatic timing of > standby... I know our BitsyX has to have an RTC. This opens all the > sensor network/logger applications market. > Kirk > > > >> 7) Real time clock. >> >> David. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> SF.Net email is sponsored by: >> Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. >> Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or >> your very >> own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/ >> geronimo.php >> _______________________________________________ >> gumstix-users mailing list >> gum...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users >> > > - > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~km > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, > discussions, > and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Laker N. <lak...@ya...> - 2005-09-27 12:58:56
|
Mounting is #1. This needs to be standardized somehow, regardless of board configuration. Perhaps a standard width of (dare I say it) unused PCB that aligns evenly on all boards when stacked so they can fit in some type of slotted case. I am very pleased with my 0-80 screw connections for rigidity (especially compared to my initial dismay at the flimsiness), but it is unworkable for mass production. Forget 4mb flash entirely. I'm playing hell to get the mix I want in the kernel, even with putting user mode stuff on MMC (which I'd prefer to have built into a single image for distribution anyway). 16mb is okay for now, but 64mb (or more, of course) would position the board nicely for long term growth and more sophisticated applications. Size matters to the designer based on the design they're contemplating -- i.e., it's real subjective. Personally I'd prefer to see the same footprint (80x20) with consolidated features vs. stacking (thickness). FWIW, what could be done with 60x20? I'm just visualizing the board size compared to most USB flash drives. If a 180 degree USB host connector was mounted so a USB drive (or A-end cable) would connect in parallel with a gumstix board then anecdotally, at least, 60x20 may match up nicely. Bluetooth is great for "wearable" computing, but WiFi onboard would be nice for the application(s) I'm working on. BTW, does the current kernel support any WiFi encryption (I'm thinking WPA or even AES)? My second project is going to be a portable, lightweight (obviously) wireless firewall/router device. One end is wired to a device (e.g. laptop) and the other WiFi (network) or vice-versa. Better yet, how about dual-WiFi card on different channels? Just power it up and let it find the networks. LEDs would tell the story. Laker --- Craig Hughes <cr...@gu...> wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen > gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based... ... Thoughts welcome. > > C > > __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com |
From: Dominic J. E. <sa...@th...> - 2005-09-27 13:48:29
|
On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, Craig Hughes wrote: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them > which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- > callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel > interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash > will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So > we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) I would keep the current size - It'll give you more real estate (relatively speaking) to do stuff (more on this later:) > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep > the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept > sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. I see a lot of problems with keeping either of the connectors - I say scrap both the 60 and 92-pin (since you're pretty much already throwing out backwards compatabillity) - and use a proper howevermany-pin connector, that'll pass through all the neccesary signals everywhere, and for the love of God, make it properly STACKABLE. Which brings me to the other point - my one biggest complaint with the current design(s), is that, whereas the gumstix stuff is sorta flexible, it's not really - look at the many of us who're trying to hook up touchscreen LCD's: You either have to botch a tweener (Grarg.), or use a breakout board, and forego the touchscreen. (Sigh.) This would be solved with a properly stackable system, where you can mix and match all the cards however you want. Heh,se the Hirose monster 140-pin connector, if you have to. :) My biggest regret will have been having to buy all-new boards, since the 4MB isn't big enough, and I still have the lcd/touchscreen problem. But I guess that'll be a lesson. - d. -- Dominic J. Eidson "Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.the-infinite.org/ |
From: Alexandre P. N. <al...@om...> - 2005-09-27 14:04:08
|
Craig Hughes escreveu: > We're in the process of thinking about the next gen gumstix (the > motherboard, as it were). It'll be PXA27x based (looks like we're > getting approval for the CPUs with stacked RAM and flash on them > which I had previously understood they didn't want to sell to non- > callphone people -- I guess our volumes are starting to get Intel > interested maybe). Anyway, the new CPU with stacked RAM and flash > will be a *lot* smaller than the current gumstix board footprint. So > we have a choice: > > 1. Same size of 80x20mm, with more functionality on board (like wifi) > 2. About half the size, say 40x20mm, with similar functionality to > current gumstix (albeit it fancier, with host/OTG usb, video in, and > all the other goodies the PXA27x has on it) > > Right now, we're also looking at backward-compatibility on the 60-pin > connector (except with the semantics of the USB changing to OTG > instead of client only), and then most likely a new connector to > replace the existing 92-pin connector. And alternative is to keep > the 92-pin and add a 3 connector, but I personally think that concept > sucks worse than just updating the 92-pin connector. > Well, I guess backward-compability shouldn't be a priority, because you cannot reach it on one point without getting things complicated on other point. I guess you probably should consider both board options. I personally don't think wi-fi should be standard on all boards, it should be an optional feature for me. I would like to see consistent connectors, i.e., today you have a bus one with missing lines and a IO one that with pxa27x will have missing lines. Missing lines aren't a good thing :-) If I recall correctly, 27x has both usb-client and usb-host and one of them has more than one port, all of this should come out through a connector (or connectors). Plus videocap, full bus w/ dma, etc. I would consider having two connectors on the same side, apart of each other, so that you could use them for better fixing the board without requiring spacers, holes and stuff. If these were on the component side, you should move the reset button to the other side, otherwise it will be useless (IMHO it already is useless today, depending on mount). Yet better, reset lines should be accessible through one of the connectors. I comfortably use 4mb flash memory for some projects of my company, but I guess for a future product that is useless (perhaps 8mb would do, 16mb is better, but pricing matters). As for the option two (about half the size), I personally won't need if for the next few months, but would have a use for it by next year. You really should consider having both :-) Today you have both connex and basix, IMHO you should have the option #2 being a replacement for both of them with lines for all the additional features of pxa 27x, and perhaps option #1 could be something close to today's gumstix size, but creating a product line with several features built in (i.e. wifi, ethernet, perhaps a mini-gps, or even a "wifi and bluetooth" one, well, there are many options). Just my two cents. Regards, Alexandre |