On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Dilwyn Jones <dil...@evans1511.fsnet.co.uk>wrote:
> Geoff Wicks wrote: > >> From then on the project faded from view. >> >> Can it be revived? I know very little about hardware, but I sense there is >> a new interest in native hardware and some projects that people thought >> would never come now seem feasible. It is for you hardware specialists to >> determine what is possible and what is not, >> > I'd go as far as to say that it is too late in the day for any conventional > QL replacements now, with one exception. > > To stand any chance of success it will need: > > 1. Low component count > 2. Commonly available components (e.g. memory, keyboards, case, power > supply) > 3. Sufficiently simple and low cost to allow small production runs and > assembled by hand by one or two individuals. > 4. Able to use either Minerva or an existing (or easily modifiable existing > SMSQ/E version) > 5. Cost no more than about £200 - £300 > 6. Hires display with at least 16-bit colour. > > To clarify what I mean I'll call it "QL On A Chip or two". > > Q40, Q60, Aurora, Goldfire... great designs in their time, but now we need > a radical leap forward to stand a chance of success. Indeed an FPGA implementation of an m68k chip, or emulation of an n68k on some other lightweight chip are the only two economically sensible solutions. I preferred the ARM embedded option because in part it is smple and quick and a software problem, and in part because it matches my skills and ability to make it happen. However, Peter Graf showed that a 68000 in a FPGA is possible (not easy, but possible) and therefore if we can find someone to take an existing vhdl 68000 core and build a QL around it in a FPGA, we can build a new system with a 2- or 3- chip board and VERY low cost. The biggest advantage here being that the boards would be easily reconfigurable/updatable at a later date. imho. Dave _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
