20 Oct
2004
20 Oct
'04
11:15 p.m.
>> Tony Duell wrote:
>> >
>> > I totally diaagree with that comment. My interest in computers is
>> > hardware related (I follow Steve Ciarcia in that 'my favourite
>> > language is solder' :-)).
I also have a large interest in the hardware details of the machines.
On the other hand I am a complete (though professionally trained)
Klutz when it comes to working with it. Great in theory, poor in practice
(but that is really another topic).
>> > And to me, therefore, a bit-serial
processor made from
>> > either simple integrated circuits or discrete transistors
>> > (I forget which the 8/S is) is a lot more interesting
>> > than a machine built round a microprocessor and, even worse,
>> > semi-custom video and sound ICs.
Here I disagree a bit. I worked for a firm that designed custom
Monolithics and hybrid products. From a repairability aspect this
Effectively makes them "bricks". The functional detailes of these
Products were however well documented and it was possible to
Learn most of the inner workings.
Items like custon-video and sound tend to be totally proprietary and
Their inner workings a mystery. On the other hand, processors tend
to be very well documented on the inner workings. These I find just
(or nearly) as interesting with the only downside that I can learn
but not modify or repair.
Regardless of the processor/OS/language/etc, I truly believe that
It is impossible to write great software without an understanding
Of the internal hardware. True, we do not (typically) need to think
through every register/register transfer for application design. But
Still.....