On 10/22/05, Viktor Pracht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Samstag, den 22.10.2005, 10:54 +0200 schrieb Attila Kinali: > > > I would rather start from the other end: What for do we need > > such a connector? If there is no need, do not put it in. > > I know it would be cool to have one, to be able to extend > > the board, to play with it. But keep in mind that everything > > we add also adds cost in production. But such features > > add very little value to the casual customer. > > The freely usable I/O pins attached to a huge FPGA are the *ONLY* reason > I'm following this project.
I agree. OGD is supposed to be a GENERAL project board. Obviously, it has hardware specialized for video, but similar boards have nothing BUT general I/Os on them. Many uses of OGD will not use the video hardware or memory at all, while others will use stock video logic only as a convenient readout on some cheap CRT. > About the pins themselves: a grid of bare pins 0.1 inch apart seems to > be the easiest to connect to. Make as many pins as will fit without > affecting signal quality or bus widths elsewhere. If the pins cost too > much, make only a few (if any) and leave the rest as pads with holes. What dspmind was asking for is to identify a STANDARD connector that we could use. The idea is to make it convenient to attach a daughter board or ribbon cable going somewhere else. So, what is the spacing for IDE cables, for instance? If you could use any old IDE cable lying around, that would also make it cheaper and more convenient to get cables. (If you're thinking about turning this into a RAID card, note that the interface isn't going to be IDE. Now that I think about it, probably one row of pins should be all grounds, which might make it directly workable. But otherwise, you'll need a special cable made.) _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
