2011/11/2 Charles Henry <czhenry@gmail.com>:
>
> That's clearly just for the development board--I think their
> processors can handle more channels,
But a single USB 2.0 Port won't handle much more in duplex mode, IIRC
> but the $350 development board
> will support up to 6 channels. It would be better to develop some
> board designs around the chips, and see how the cost comes out.
Maybe.
Depending on what the base-module would require,
unit price could drop or increase.
>> - Make most of it optional and modular.
>> - Make 1 (extensible) low-cost + 1 (all-incl.) high-end design
>
> Yes, I tend to agree. There's several different processors in their
> product line, and it's a good development platform to look at tiered
> approaches with different goals.
>
>
> Thanks for your feedback, Emanuel. It's sort of a game-changer to me.
> Clearly, there's no point in starting a project that would duplicate
> an existing solution.
I see.
> I appreciate new information like this.
> I'll have to think this over for quite a while to see which way I'd
> want to go--whether there's a worthy project goal in an FPGA based
> design that cannot be more easily (or more cheaply) accomplished.
>
FPGAs can process much data in little time concurrently,
but as we see, alternatives open up.
Anyway, if you came up with anything new, let us know.
Kind regards,
Emanuel
-- E.R. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-userReceived on Sat Nov 5 00:15:02 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Nov 05 2011 - 00:15:02 EET