20 Oct
2006
20 Oct
'06
3:05 p.m.
On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Doc Shipley wrote:
1) I like the idea of using something like ARM
processors With
everything built into the chip, you'd not only get a much smaller
component count, but it seems to me that most of the layout and basic
code would likely be already out there. All that spells a lower
long-run cost in general, and more universal accessibility.
I was thinking the same thing. Heck, if you are using an ARM already, lots
of *nix type OS have already been ported to it, which might mean there are
already even more software tools ready for use.
2) RS232/RS422 serial is getting harder to support,
and will continue to
get worse. USB is simply not an option for some of us. Anyone with a
PDP-11 or a C64 can support an ethernet connection, and almost (?)
everything needed for implementation for both host and appliance is
already there. Plus, the standards for ethernet transactions are not as
"widely interpreted" as those for USB or serial.
Personally, if someone is going to build a small device such as this, I'd
really like to see at least 3 interface options; RS232 serial, USB 2.0,
and ethernet. These would pretty much cover 99% of the folks who'd want to
use it. If someone wanted to get fancy, firewire would be another option,
but USB 2.0 would cover most of the folks who'd want firewire anyway.
3) It might be well to stipulate and design this as a
tool for advanced
users only, at least to start. I'd happily settle for something simple
and raw with 8 pages of install instructions. As an example of what I
mean and why, if TFTP is used, having that set up by hand makes it more
likely that the user understands the security implications and will
handle that.
4) Same concept concerning host platforms. I vote for $FreeOS as the
initial supporting platform, but if DOS works better, so be it. Get it
out the door and running, and somebody else will write support for the
other platforms.
5) For anyone not a network geek, DHCP is a right pain to manage, as is
broadcast TFTP. Again as a short-term implementation, how about
stipulating a dedicated interface, with the IP preprogrammed and
programmable? If can't leave it dedicated, I could set the host IP to
talk to the appliance and reprogram the appliance IP and TFTP target to
match my subnet. That should actually reduce the amount of setup on the
host side.
Is anyone else here familiar with the Empeg? StrongARM processor, USB,
serial, ethernet and running Linux. One thing that I think they got right
were the connectivity options. USB works pretty much out of the box, as
does serial. Ethernet support can work with DHCP or can be manually
configured.
6) Git 'er dun. I'd like to point at The
Great Universal Archive Format
Project of a couple of years ago. Trying to anticipate and solve every
possible permutation killed that deader than hell. Design in some room
to grow, cover the basic common disk formats, and expect v1.0 to suck.
I don't have any design skills to offer, but I'd throw some dollars in
the pot and such free time as I have for testing. This is a tool that
I'd very much like to have.
I have a literal pile of 5.25" drive chassis with DB37 connectors on
them...
I'm not sure which type of 5.25" drive was still installed when they were
decommissioned though.
I am setup where I can fab cables and wiring harnesses (with the most
common types of connectors anyway). Anything I don't have in the way of
tooling I can probably find if needed too.
-Toth