15 Feb
2008
15 Feb
'08
1:37 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
..
Date: Fri, 15
Feb 2008 12:54:01 -0500
From: Dave McGuire
Brain-dead in the extreme, although the model might be interesting
for the "1900 Computer" thread. You had 8 registers, a shifter and
an ALU. R0 was the implied source for binary operations, but not
implied as an accumulator. The instruction set was 8 instructions: As one who has had the extreme displeasure of
programming both the
8X300 and an 8X305,
Are they really that bad? How so?
By any measure, the PIC1640 was miles ahead in terms of ease of
programming.
Just to mention, the SMS300 (and the CPC1600, but not the PIC1640) is
covered in the Osborne book ("Intro. to Microcomputers, Vol. II,
Some Real Products)".
Reading the Osborne book some time ago I got the impression the SMS300
might be considered the first (micro-)DSP. Extracts:
"The SMS300 is described by its manufacturer as a "microcontroller"
rather than a "microprocessor". This distinction draws attention to
the very unique capabilities of the SMS300 which make it the most
remarkable device described in this book."
"The SMS300 is designed to serve as a signal processor, operating
at very high speed. The SMS300 can handle applications of this type
at more than 10 times the speed of any other device described in
this book."
"If yours is a high speed signal processing application, then give
the SMS300 serious consideration; otherwise, the SMS300 is probably
not for you."