Where are the SX28's at?
eagletalontim
Posts: 1,399
I just noticed that the SX28 DP's are out of stock and there is no estimated date when they will be back in stock. Anyone know when or if they will be back? I sell a product that uses these and I only have 5 left [noparse]:([/noparse]
Comments
They are going to stop producing the SX. You may want to start a redesign now.....to handle when the SX is gone.
Parallax has stated they are going to buy enough for a couple of years ( I can't remember how long they guesstimated), but if it were me, I wouldn't take any chances.
That way when the SX's are gone, you just switch over to your new design......
James L
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
James L
Partner/Designer
Lil Brother SMT Assembly Services
Are you addicted to technology or Micro-controllers..... then checkout the forums at Savage Circuits. Learn to build your own Gizmos!
I can't say if you could have a direct replacement, but there are many chips you could probably redesign with. I guess it just depends on what it does, and how much programming it would take for a new chip to do the same thing.
James L
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
James L
Partner/Designer
Lil Brother SMT Assembly Services
Are you addicted to technology or Micro-controllers..... then checkout the forums at Savage Circuits. Learn to build your own Gizmos!
So you need a simple chip which comes in a dip style. You need 16 I/O, and simple to program. What about calculation speed?
I don't know of any, but if you get the specifications out there...someone may be able to recommend a chip.
James L
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
James L
Partner/Designer
Lil Brother SMT Assembly Services
Are you addicted to technology or Micro-controllers..... then checkout the forums at Savage Circuits. Learn to build your own Gizmos!
EDIT : The calculation speed does not have to be that fast at all. I run the SX28 without a frequency chip when installed on my PCB. Some other items I am experimenting on use 50mhz.
Ken Gracey
Parallax Inc.
250,000 SX chips is a lot. It will take some time to exhaust them (on the order of years). Don't rush to redesign your product, but do start learning a new system and start thinking about how you would improve what you have when you do redesign it.
Post Edited (Mike Green) : 10/26/2009 3:05:16 AM GMT
Post Edited (Mike Green) : 10/26/2009 3:48:45 AM GMT
-Dan
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"A saint-like quantity of patience is a help, if this is unavailable, a salty vocabulary works nearly as well." - A. S. Weaver
-Phil
Ken Gracey
Parallax Inc.
Robert
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
I'm not sure of the memory requirements, for i haven't compared the two. Just for information, the Propeller runs on 3.3 volts not 5 volts.
I thought that may be important to your considerations.
James L
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
James L
Partner/Designer
Lil Brother SMT Assembly Services
Are you addicted to technology or Micro-controllers..... then checkout the forums at Savage Circuits. Learn to build your own Gizmos!
Technically, you'll have more space -- you have eight cogs each with 2K (bytes). Now, cog memory is broken into longs (four bytes) so you only have 512 per cog but still, you have a total of 4K longs inside the Propeller.
Don't worry about the reduction in instructions within a cog -- PASM is far more powerful than SX assembly. Give the Propeller a try; you'll find that integrating code written by others is simpler. And I'm very confident you'll be able to port your dual SX28 projects to one Propeller, especially if the bulk of your code in Spin is not limited by the cog RAM size.
Ken Gracey
Parallax Inc.
Don't get wrapped around the axle (pun intended, as you do automotive projects) with the term "cog" -- it's a fancy term for processor. In your dual-SX system you have to establish a communication link with wires and a protocol. It's much easier going cog-to-cog: you simply define a section of hub RAM (main, 32K) that both cogs know about and can exchange information. You could, for example, have a cog devoted to monitoring a sensor; it can write the sensor value to the hub were that value can be picked up by another cog that is maintaining a display. Since the sensor reading and display updates take place in different processors (cogs) you don't have to worry about them clashing with each other, and you can change one without worrying about the other. This makes writing code for the Propeller more modular, and code is generally easier to maintain and update.
Yes, it takes a little time getting used to, but once you do you'll find that you can do advanced things more easily in the Propeller than in the SX (my opinion, not looking to start a war here). I use the SX and Propeller every day and on a big SX-based animatronics control project I delivered a couple of weeks ago kept thinking, "Man, I wish this controller had Propeller on it."