Latest CX16 YT video.

[codewar65]

I got the weirdest vibs from David's latest video. Not sure how to read this. Neither one seem happy, but both seem to need to address the we/us.

[DragWx]

It looked pretty normal to me. The first half of the video explains how things have gotten pretty busy though, so that might be what it is.

Speaking of which, I'm very happy that the process of getting the X16 manufactured is being documented, because it's such a power play to go "well we'll just get the equipment to assemble the PCBs ourselves!"

[paulscottrobson]

It might just be not being used to each other. Most of the time on his videos DM does most of the talking, sometimes in the past other people have made short presentations on bits of the X16 (Case, Manual, Hardware, Vera etc.).

It may also have been more unscripted than normal.

[Edmond D]

The video seemed to be a "soft spin" on the X16 - neither damning it or praising it outright. Rather a kind of status update of the problems and potential solutions plus a pitch of what the future (Gen2 & usage) might become. I see it as an honest attempt to inform the community with the intent to avoid the onslaught of speculative questions that have or will come up.

One can be either developing the X16 or talking about the development. Splitting between the two is kind of like pre-emptive multitasking with the associated overhead that takes consumes what are limited resources. Unfortunately I'm one of later (talker); my intentions should be to help the project in some way.

My only disappointment with the Dev product is that the cards won't fit inside the supplied enclosure/case. I'll have to go on the hunt for something that works for my desire.

My final thought is that the development work will continue even after hardware ships. My hope is that it doesn't split and divide the project or community as the physically different generations come out.

[BruceRMcF]

I got the weirdest vibs from David's latest video. Not sure how to read this. Neither one seem happy, but both seem to need to address the we/us.

I don't think there was anything off about it. It's an update in the middle of some problems being hashed out, so it just can't have the tone of a release video, which obviously comes out after the problems have been hashed out.

And bear in mind that in the second half of the video addressing "frequently asked questions", it being the internet, a lot of those questions would have existed in an original form that was far harsher and aggressive than the way they expressed them. The people who says "we ought to do something like this" and then never does anything more about it only gets some to and fro about "no, it should be like that" and "no, you're both wrong, here is the one and only true way", but the people who actually set out to do something open the door to an unending flow of flack from people. And since critics more often than not do not check up on the questions that have been raised before and the previous responses, a lot of that flack is under-informed.

[Daedalus]

That was an awesome video! It was like watching John Nash's "Nash Equilibrium" in action.

I love the X16 concept, and I have no problem with it being made from through hole parts, it's a "Retro Vintage" design that has a lot of appeal and will show well at conventions, where a LOT of sales can be made of the systems and programs, not to mention the marketing buzz just being there showing it can generate. But! You ain't doing that for 100 bucks. 500 bucks is the reasonable price for the Gen 1 systems. Sure, you can go out and buy a PC that's... probably... 50,000 times more capable for that price, but that's economics for you.

TexELEC's position seems to be the more grounded one, he even spent his own money on a pick and place machine capable of the simple task of populating small surface mount boards like the VERA module, that and the oven they bought solves the manufacturing problem for small, surface mount designs and is able to produce small runs at a reasonable cost.

In my opinion, FPGAs are the future. Through hole designs with their clunky, space wasting "support chips" are an anachronism best left to dedicated "Vintage" enthusiasts who are willing to pay the high cost. If you're willing to go that path, (WHICH I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH.) then you need to unapologetically charge the price you need to charge for that added "value."

That said, I'm going to go to the website and buy the Gen 1 set for 500 when it's available. It's a fair price, and I want one.

Back to the "Vintage Through Hole vs Surface Mount" debate: Surface mount isn't even that hard to do for the hobbyist. Sure, you need to upgrade your gear... in addition to a soldering iron, you need a hot air rework station and a hot plate of any stripe (I've done simple boards with an electric skillet I bought at Target for 35 bucks.) If you want to do development for FPGAs, there are open source solutions you can use on a PC (I recommend a Linux based computer for that.) that you need to download and learn, but it's no harder than learning to program. ... And you needed to know how to program anyway just to be able to implement new ideas on ANY platform.

[Wavicle]

Back to the "Vintage Through Hole vs Surface Mount" debate: Surface mount isn't even that hard to do for the hobbyist. Sure, you need to upgrade your gear... in addition to a soldering iron, you need a hot air rework station and a hot plate of any stripe (I've done simple boards with an electric skillet I bought at Target for 35 bucks.) If you want to do development for FPGAs, there are open source solutions you can use on a PC (I recommend a Linux based computer for that.) that you need to download and learn, but it's no harder than learning to program. ... And you needed to know how to program anyway just to be able to implement new ideas on ANY platform.

I would go so far as to say as long as you aren't doing the tiny components, and don't have significant issues with steady hands, surface mount is faster and easier for hobbyists. There are a few skills and techniques to learn, and you'll probably never long for THT again. I taught my 20-year-old daughter to assemble both my Mini-ITX all-through-hole X16 and the SMT VERAs 6 months ago. She prefers surface mount assembly by a wide margin. When I had the new YM2151 FPGA boards, she asked if I needed help assembling them. She didn't ask that same question for my last few through hole boards.

The only thing that I prefer through hole for is board rework. It isn't much fun trying to solder a bodge wire to a 0.25mm pad which is 0.25mm away from another 0.25mm pad. I can do it, but it takes a few attempts and often leaves me frustrated.

[Daedalus]

The only thing that I prefer through hole for is board rework. It isn't much fun trying to solder a bodge wire to a 0.25mm pad which is 0.25mm away from another 0.25mm pad. I can do it, but it takes a few attempts and often leaves me frustrated.

No argument there. At the same time, however... the board you're working with is generally very small and prototypes are cheap and fast to get through outfits like PCBway... (I've never used them, but after they ponied up all these boards to David just for a mention, I think they deserve some love.) It's not like in the old days when it took weeks to get even the smallest quantity of boards made and it cost a grand just to call them on the phone. And of course, you had to take the gerber files TO A LITERAL PRINTER that had a Gerber Photoplotter to make the artwork first. Then you had to shlep the artwork across town in your Mk1 Volkswagon Rabbit just so you can wait WEEEEEKS for the boards to get back.

It was rough back in the dark ages. Kids today don't know how lucky they have it.

[Ed Minchau]

The only thing that I prefer through hole for is board rework. It isn't much fun trying to solder a bodge wire to a 0.25mm pad which is 0.25mm away from another 0.25mm pad. I can do it, but it takes a few attempts and often leaves me frustrated.

Believe me, it's no fun fixing the solder on an 0102 SMT cap either.

[BruceRMcF]

... ... But! You ain't doing that for 100 bucks. 500 bucks is the reasonable price for the Gen 1 systems. Sure, you can go out and buy a PC that's... probably... 50,000 times more capable for that price, but that's economics for you. ...

And when the game console version comes out, with mostly surface mount parts ... indeed, given that OPM parts are not as abundant as some in the design team seems to have thought, even fewer than had previously been thought ... $150-$175 seems to me to be a reasonable price.

However, a small but noisy group of "it doesn't cost $50 like you said" folks have descended on the Facebook group. So if the youtube video seemed just a touch defensive, looking at the comments on Facebook may help to highlight the kind of unrealistic expectations they were addressing in the FAQ part of the video.