<div dir="ltr">I see your point. At this precise moment, your standard is up-to-date. I cannot complain. But just imagine that the EOMA things had gone faster and 1 year ago it was in production - before list discussion took place and decision to add USB3.0 was made (there is a planned update to USB3.1 with something like 10Gbit). Could we say that EOMA will be limiting for its users (it it missed the USB3.0)? Could you claim Gbit ethernet if EOMA had only USB2.0? Will anyone that plans on NAS-like server usage jump on EOMA product if he knows that there is no native SATA but just USB to SATA + USB to Gbit on one 480mbit/s port? Not to mention possibility to end up with 12Mbit/s port on some cards...<div>
Even now it is limiting because the same A10, A20, i.MX provide SATA, PCIe that base board designer cannot use. Not to mention MIPI and other high speed board interfaces. Is there a good way to add a camera (or even 2) to an EOMA based board? I think USB will come to the resque? But even now it is over-saturated for some of the boards...</div>
<div>I checked EOMA page at elinux - there is a planned update of the standard in "2-3 years". I would say, backward compatibility will be lost? New base boards for new CPU cards? Where is the 10 years lifespan? Who will care producing old standard cpu cards with new SoCs?</div>
<div>You say Gbit Ethernet - but IC1T does not have this? So I, in the position of designer of base board, cannot rely on this because some cards with give limited speed? </div><div>In fact you are using one single multifunctional interface as backup - I mean the USB. If SoC does not support something, add it on USB. From the early days of EOMA you are ruling out the OMAPs because of HS-only USB. But the same workaround as for low end cards could have save the OMAP CPU card - you just need a HUB (on the CPU card). Probably this was the point behind developing SoC with HS only USB? Even with other "supported" SoC designers are ending with USB HUBs on the base board... So there is an alternative solutioin - base boards that need to connect internal low/full speed USB devices need to add a hub. If my product does not export user USB out of the "base board", and has nothing but HS capable on board peripherals, I can safely use any card, even those with OMAPs. </div>
<div>Miguel speaks about <16ms reaction time (this is another topic), but obviously he demands some performance. So, for this reason or another, his product will never work with low end card (beside presenting "unsupported cpu card" message). To be able to sell products he has to satisfy user demands. Limited audio bit depth and network speed are bad for him - one youtube review about slow game console and mass user will be lost. Yes, geeks will know that with good cpu card everything is fine, so it comes to the same point where we started - "someone" will define list of supported cards, even if it is not Miguel because he is not allowed to do it by standard.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I have another question, sorry if it is out of context here. I know PCMCIA was designed long ago - is it certified that it will run fine with 5Gbits signals USB3.0? Does it comply to impedance matching for all interfaces? How about EMI? I am asking because one reason (for us) to switch to another SoM format was newer, high speed interfaces. Our suppliers switched to connectors that are compatible with newer standards. Maybe they could route out HS USB or SATA on ISA connector... I even doubt if PCMCIA can cope to USB2.0 HS routing requirements. I know it works in practice, even with flying wires. But not for production HW.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2014-08-11 9:48 GMT+03:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lkcl@lkcl.net" target="_blank">lkcl@lkcl.net</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="">On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:17 AM, krasi gichev <<a href="mailto:krasimirr@gmail.com">krasimirr@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> out of curiosity, i'd be interested to hear if the design that you<br>
>> are creating is intended for anything approaching a decade-long<br>
>> support and end-user lifespan.<br>
><br>
> First of all, I want to make it clear that my area is closer to industrial<br>
> and sometimes automotive than consumer. Also, I am sure that I don't have<br>
> your experience and I don't see all the details that you have seen - and<br>
> large customers that expect the CPU cards.<br>
><br>
> And, the usual disclaimer, this post will not bring any creative ideas, it<br>
> will explain my position, so feel free to stop reading here...<br>
><br>
> But what I have learned in recent years is that there is no such thing like<br>
> "one size fits all". Even if something fits well at the current time, this<br>
> is temporal and will change in several months or an year.<br>
> In our devices, in past 10 years, we had passed over several form factors of<br>
> "processing boards" - PC104, ISA, ETX, and some other, our own too. And what<br>
> we got like benefits is limited to:<br>
> - possible second source - I hope the EOMA will be able to attract more that<br>
> one designer and producer of CPU cards<br>
> - possible upgrade of the CPU card - this works sometimes, but never for 10<br>
> years<br>
<br>
</div> ok, this intrigues me, that it is not clear why you believe that the<br>
interfaces selected would not last another 10 years. do you have time<br>
to go through them?<br>
<br>
* ethernet. GbE. has been around for 2+ decades. do you expect GbE<br>
to be around for another 10 years?<br>
<br>
* USB3. USB2 has been around for 2 + decades. it has been upgraded<br>
to USB3 which is 5gb/sec at the moment.. do you expect USB3 to be<br>
around for another 10 years? in fact, i understand that USB3 is to<br>
get at least *another* speed upgrade.<br>
<br>
* GPIO, UART, I2C, SPI i think it safe to say that these will be<br>
around for at least a decade?<br>
<br>
* SD/MMC. has been around for around 2 decades, and is constantly<br>
being upgraded. i think it safe to say that this will be around for<br>
another decade?<br>
<br>
* RGB/TTL. has been around for 2+ decades. it's the baseline for<br>
video output. there's always going to be converter ICs, no matter<br>
what the latest-and-greatest standard.<br>
<br>
i think it reason-ably safe to say that every single interface picked<br>
on the EOMA68 standard has a lifetime of at least one decade. as in<br>
there are reasons why every single interface has already been<br>
long-term and will continue to be so.<br>
<div class=""><br>
<br>
> - maybe 2-3-5 years is realistic ( I mean in industrial, in consumer 1<br>
> year top); with current CAD tools it is not so hard to redesign to other<br>
> form factor (you know it, you have made many desing recently)<br>
<br>
</div> yeees, but now you have set a MOQ for pricing for your clients. the<br>
purpose of the EOMA68 standard is to bring the benefit of mass-volume<br>
pricing *even* to this smaller custom run market.<br>
<div class=""><br>
> Nope, I cannot even imagine that something (commercial) will live for so<br>
> long. It might run fine but customers are always demanding new features,<br>
<br>
</div> how many of those features do not fit into USB3, SPI, SD/MMC and I2C?<br>
<div class=""><br>
> better perfomance (even just better design).<br>
<br>
</div> what do you mean by performance? do you mean anything other than<br>
better CPU, better RAM, faster RAM, more RAM or more storage? because<br>
those are exactly what is on the CPU Card.<br>
<div class=""><br>
> My point is (and probably I am biased by my lifestyle) that I will prefer to<br>
> put the old one in the basement, or on the e-bay, and just go for the<br>
> newest. Or, if you prefer, recycle it.<br>
<br>
</div> exactly! so just buy a new base-unit, keep the CPU Card, you have<br>
just saved 30% on the cost of a monolithic unit.<br>
<br>
ok, there's a lot here, i have to get on, more later ok?<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
l.<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
arm-netbook mailing list <a href="mailto:arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk">arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook" target="_blank">http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook</a><br>
Send large attachments to <a href="mailto:arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk">arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk</a></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>