On 4/22/08, dolphinling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Timothy Normand Miller wrote: > > > I figured that the OGD1 order form should link to an FAQ. Here are > > some ideas. Please critique and suggest more. > > > > [...] > > > > ** Who designed OGD1? > > > > The founder of the OGP, Timothy Miller, and his partners at Traversal, > > Andy Fong and Howard Parkin, have in excess of a combined 30 years of > > hardware (PCB, ASIC, FPGA) design experience. In particular, they > > have experience developing graphics hardware used in air traffic > > control and military installations. OGD1 was designed based on that > > experience, with high standards for reliability, signal integrity, and > > component selection. > > > > (If I were anything more than a lurker waiting for OGC) I'd feel more > comfortable knowing that more than 3 people were involved in making my $1500 > piece of hardware. Perhaps mention all the people who've looked over the > design and made suggestions, improvements, and fixes?
Attila makes a point, but I'll take this as an opportunity to thank people and make a good marketing statement. How's this: ** Who designed OGD1? The founder of the OGP, Timothy Miller, and his partners at Traversal, Andy Fong and Howard Parkin, have in excess of a combined 30 years of hardware (PCB, ASIC, FPGA) design experience. In particular, they have experience developing graphics hardware used in air traffic control and military installations. OGD1 was designed based on that experience, with high standards for reliability, signal integrity, and component selection. Many other contributors to the OGP also have extensive hardware design experience. We would like to thank them for lending us their time to carefully examine OGD1's schematics and help us look for mistakes. Our experience has shown that many eyeballs do indeed make all bugs shallow. I'm not really sure if this is the best way to say this. OGD1 had bugs. As far as we know, there aren't any left, or at least none that have caused us any problems. I don't want to make either the claim that we're bug free (especially in the analog world, something is not necessarily either a bug or a non-bug), but I also don't want to give the impression that there were lots of bugs that we have, we hope, since fixed. Because there weren't. We had some problems that we had to work around on the earliest prototype. Two memory data lines were shorted together (on the artwork and PCB, not the schematic), the PCI clock signal was not on a clock pin (although we make it work anyhow), there were some signal integrity issues here and there that we tightened up. Andy started the schematics, and Howard finished them, and they did an excellent job. We had OGP list members and some professional contacts review it, and then the greatest catcher of bugs (few that there were) was the guy we hired to finish the artwork. Then Howard tested it in a lab with some simple logic and testing software, then we took it to OSCON, and it worked there. As an informal thing to say only on the mailing list to people who understand how to take this with a grain of salt, any remaining bugs in OGD1 are likely to be the kind we can work around trivially. What's the best way to say this without coming across as overly confident, arrogant, or stupid? -- Timothy Normand Miller http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~millerti Open Graphics Project _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
