Timeline for native mode 1281
mikep wrote:I think this thread probably belongs in the native mode forum.
Don answered the question for the ZX1281n but I think Paul is looking for a ZX1281ne; that is an Oak Micros version. As you may have noticed I have not yet announced any native mode equivalent devices such as a ZX24ne.
Yes, I've noticed that.
Thanks Don for the rough and preliminary target.
Mike, if it's disclosable information, are you aiming to make native mode OakMicros devices?
Well, it may not be as much of a no-brainer decision for Oak Micros as it is for Elba Corp. The reason is that Oak Micros already has something that works in "native mode" (the OM128). It does not have all the bells and whistles of the multitasking OS, and the pre-written library, but you DO have access to the speed of the raw hardware, and the convenience of a socketed single-component fully functional microcontroller. The Elba Corp. Native Mode devices are a nice half-way step between the enormous convenience of the ZX platform and the speed of the unadulterated AVR hardware.pjc30943 wrote:If I may be so bold as to saymikep wrote:I would say that this is under discussion so I don't have an answer today.pjc30943 wrote:Mike, if it's disclosable information, are you aiming to make native mode OakMicros devices?, hopefully the discussion is towards "yes"...
So I can see the need to discuss it a bit before making decisions. When the Native Mode ZX devices were announced, I immediately wondered the same thing you did.
-Tony
A question for Paul, Tony and other users of Oak Micros devices. What is it that attracts you to these devices? Here are some possible answers:pjc30943 wrote:If I may be so bold as to saymikep wrote:I would say that this is under discussion so I don't have an answer today.pjc30943 wrote:Mike, if it's disclosable information, are you aiming to make native mode OakMicros devices?
1. Compact, breadboardable device with 30 I/O pins
2. Switchable logic/RS232 level on USART
3. MAX202 transceiver for "real" RS232 voltage levels
4. Socketable EEPROM on mega32/mega644 devices
5. Second USART on mega128/mega1281 devices
6. Very large flash (program memory) on mega128/mega1281 devices
7. 64K Extended RAM daughterboard for mega128/mega1281 devices
For example would a 32K or 64K EEPROM-based device with 2 USARTs and 4K RAM in a ZX24e/ZX24ae layout (2" x 0.7") be suitable for most purposes? Would it be helpful to have a native mode equivalent with 60K of flash?
Mike Perks
mikep wrote:A question for Paul, Tony and other users of Oak Micros devices. What is it that attracts you to these devices?
YES: Compact, breadboardable device with 30 I/O pins. I like the ability to have a simple device I can stick into my powered breadboard and be ready to program immediately.
Not as important: Switchable logic/RS232 level on USART
If I were going to need to do more work over RS232 then the MAX202 transceiver for "real" RS232 voltage levels would be very important.
Not as important: Socketable EEPROM on mega32/mega644 devices, although I do have the FRAM option installed. So far, I do not need to remove and replace the EEPROM/FRAM.
Yes, I usually have output to an LCD display, and I like having a second hardware USART on mega128/mega1281 devices
So far I have not run out of program memory so Very large flash (program memory) on mega128/mega1281 devices has not been critical. Yet...
I like the 64K Extended RAM daughterboard for mega128/mega1281 devices, and I have one. I have not put it to great use so far.
Yes: a 32K or 64K EEPROM-based device with 2 USARTs and 4K RAM in a ZX24e/ZX24ae layout (2" x 0.7") be suitable for most purposes? Would it be helpful to have a native mode equivalent with 60K of flash? I think you are referring to the ATMega644P for this? I have not checked the price of the 644P, but I would think that the price would be comparable to the plain old 644. I have heard availability is an issue for the 644P. It seems to me that it makes sense to use the most sophisticated processor (within reason) that will fit into the overall package, such as the ZX24ae footprint.
-Tony
Very similar to Tony, my answers are:
Biggest draws: breadboardable, compact, easily removable device with more IO pins than the 24 models; in fact, even if it were hard to remove, a larger form-factor with more IO (perhaps two modules connected by a cable, to make it easily removable?) would be more desirable. The 64k RAM daughterboard is a strong selling point, and one of the main reasons the Oak Micros devices are nice.
One of the draws on the 1281 devices is its increased peripheral count, such as second USART.
Switchable logic/RS232 is not as important. However, this is very useful for those who require it; our application just doesn't need it. Same with the transciever. Additionally, socketable EEPROM is not a priority. The available program space is not a priority.
IO, RAM, and peripherals (with a Zbasic library to support many of them) are what make a rich device for this target audience...
Biggest draws: breadboardable, compact, easily removable device with more IO pins than the 24 models; in fact, even if it were hard to remove, a larger form-factor with more IO (perhaps two modules connected by a cable, to make it easily removable?) would be more desirable. The 64k RAM daughterboard is a strong selling point, and one of the main reasons the Oak Micros devices are nice.
One of the draws on the 1281 devices is its increased peripheral count, such as second USART.
Switchable logic/RS232 is not as important. However, this is very useful for those who require it; our application just doesn't need it. Same with the transciever. Additionally, socketable EEPROM is not a priority. The available program space is not a priority.
IO, RAM, and peripherals (with a Zbasic library to support many of them) are what make a rich device for this target audience...
Paul