Plastic wrote: > The reason I said ARM is because it's readily available extremely > cheaply, easy to design with, and there's a plethora of available > boards already.
You could use any Microcontroller with Linux. It is debatable which non- 68K controller would be the best. I might vote for SuperH instead of ARM, but don't you think all of them are boring mainstream? :-) > The Motorola route (like the Q40/Q60) is nice'n'all > [..] That was very long ago... My own chips include the 68K processor for half a decade ;-) > The high end Coldfire route puts impositions on the OS to change > to conform to changes in instructions and registers that would be > so burdensome nobody will invest the energy. Back then I had a special idea how to work around the essential problems by hardware. But you are right inasmuch I no longer have the energy. > ARM cores are everywhere, run embedded Linux universally, and can > emulate a 680X0 faster than a 680X0 can run, natively. Mainstream again... Want a list of more CPU which can do? Yawn... :-) > Current generation multi-core ARM chips are rivaling Intel performance > in a 2W power budget. ARM chips _are_ Intel nowadays :-) As for 2W CPU power: Sounds more than what I have in mind... > Following the ARM route, we can easily obtain ready made boards for > around $100 (70 ukp) complete, or design our own (where are you, Nasta?) > and build them for around $150 (100 ukp). Add margin and it sounds expensive compared to a QL on a chip :-) > Separately, we could have our own linux distribution that strips out > EVERYTHING except the ability to run the QL emulation. Massive amount of Linux work... who would care enough to do all that? > That would make it incredibly tiny and fast-loading with a small > memory footprint and would give us the entire sensation of using > a hardware QL. Same would be possible for x86, and obviously nobody cares. You still boot something which is multitudes the size and complexity of Minerva. I can see no news and no sensation here. ARM or not ARM, running a different OS with emulator will never be as cool as the real thing :-) > In the longer term future I could see people becoming enamored with the > beauty of ARM assembly when compared against 68k assembly. If your interest is the beauty of ARM, then of course ARM is the right platform for you :-) (But didn't you write your hearts desire was the QL?) All the best Peter _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
