Commander X16

43 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

ISo the LX8 as you are imagining it is not the same LX8 that is basically available to bring to market now, unless they decide to do a few tweaks to it.

Didn't think it was.  And as I doubt there's 1000 sitting in a garage, why couldn't the design be changed before a production run was initiated?

And by the way, where did the L come from?

I hope nobody mistakes my passion for anything but that. (And incidentally, the title of this thread is a play on a theme from the 1st Clinton campaign in the 90's, I'm not calling anyone here stupid, far from it)

My expectation is not that the Commander Xwhatever takes the world by storm, but my hope is that it takes hold enough that there would be a respectable audience/ecosystem/following/what have you, that would make developing for the platform interesting, and a pleasure, and that those creations could be shared in as friction-free way as possible.

After all, a stated goal (the main goal?), is a system where it could all be understood by just 1 person.

That implies development for the platform will largely be 1 person endeavors.

People who, generally speaking, are going to be older, with appreciable limits on their free time.

2 platforms puts a strain on that free time (small/large?  that will depend) , and is going to create some areas of friction in sharing of one's work, it'll just make it harder, how much harder can be argued about.

Will it be the end of the world if both are released?  No. But it's just added complication, and for what benefit?

If the size of the market isn't at all a consideration, that the system is designed for the single user to just sit in their dim basement and hack around on and "learn about computing" then frankly, I'm not interested.  I'll buy Ben Eater's kit for that.

I'm really going to try to make this my last post on the subject, I'm sure I've annoyed many already.

Best wishes!

2 minutes ago, x16tial said:

And by the way, where did the L come from?

Someone in the other thread suggested Lieutenant as the name for the X8, since it is subordinate to a Commander. If it is to be abbreviated as anything, it should be LCX16, since Lieutenant Commander comes immediately before Commander. ?

2 hours ago, x16tial said:

Didn't think it was.  And as I doubt there's 1000 sitting in a garage, why couldn't the design be changed before a production run was initiated?



And by the way, where did the L come from?

As far as the one that "could be done now", that means the design that has already been designed, the prototype created, and it has been tested and it works.

If you take a look at the design, you would see that "Adding an I/O bus" is not tweaking that design, it would be tossing it out and doing a new one. But that is the description of the CX16e development path ... why do something that is not fully compatible with the CX16p if your are going to toss out the LX8 design and do a completely new one, especially if you are going to do a new one with an external SRAM chip.

What the "L" is a reference to? Hint: "If the C in CX16 stands for 'Commander', then a lower power system in the same family might be called a L..."

 

2 hours ago, x16tial said:

My expectation is not that the Commander Xwhatever takes the world by storm, but my hope is that it takes hold enough that there would be a respectable audience/ecosystem/following/what have you, that would make developing for the platform interesting, and a pleasure, and that those creations could be shared in as friction-free way as possible.



After all, a stated goal (the main goal?), is a system where it could all be understood by just 1 person.



That implies development for the platform will largely be 1 person endeavors.



People who, generally speaking, are going to be older, with appreciable limits on their free time.



2 platforms puts a strain on that free time (small/large?  that will depend) , and is going to create some areas of friction in sharing of one's work, it'll just make it harder, how much harder can be argued about.  ...

Of course, to understand the LX8 system all the way down to the bare metal, you have to understand FPGAs, USB device trees, and a range of other things that are not necessary to understand the more capable CX16p down to the bare metal.

Indeed, you are ignoring that another stated goal was to do it as far as possible with off the shelf ASIC components.

When it turned out that the desired price point and the desire to do it with off the shelf ASIC components were a contradiction, they came up with the approach of the CX16p/c real boards, and the CX16e simulation board.

And then Frank did the LX8 as a proof of concept of the CX16e approach.

 

 

14 minutes ago, Scott Robison said:

Someone in the other thread suggested Lieutenant as the name for the X8, since it is subordinate to a Commander. If it is to be abbreviated as anything, it should be LCX16, since Lieutenant Commander comes immediately before Commander. ?

The LX8 is far more than just one step below the CX16, hence "Lieutenant".

1 minute ago, BruceMcF said:

The LX8 is far more than just one step below the CX16, hence "Lieutenant".

Only true if something else is ever introduced between the two. ?

2 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

So it's not calling everybody stupid, it's calling everybody childish. Including David,



Maybe that was not what you intended ... in which case, I guess that's an oops for you.

That isn't what I intended, or should be inferred.  The reference is that there's an answer staring everyone in the face.  And this concludes me explaining the reference, how you take it is up to you!

Just now, Scott Robison said:

Only true if something else is ever introduced between the two. ?

No LC between a Lieutenant and a Commander in the chain of command doesn't instantly promote the Lieutenant to Lieutenant Commander.

Look, I am only putting it two steps below the Commander. I am not saying it deserved no more than Ensign rank.

2 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

No LC between a Lieutenant and a Commander in the chain of command doesn't instantly promote the Lieutenant to Lieutenant Commander.



Look, I am only putting it two steps below the Commander. I am not saying it deserved no more than Ensign rank.

Given tone of type, I'm not sure if I've hit a nerve or not. I don't *think* so but ... sorry if necessary.

I don't think calling it LX8 is useful as it does confuse people, even if the name is clever. Commander is a brand like Commodore was a brand. Lieutenant is a clever nickname like Speccy for Spectrum.

Really, given that Commodore is higher in rank than Commander, and made less capable hardware than the X16, perhaps calling X8 the Captain would make more sense.

In any case ... it doesn't matter. I know what you're talking about. Just sharing my opinion.

1 hour ago, x16tial said:

That isn't what I intended, or should be inferred.  The reference is that there's an answer staring everyone in the face.  And this concludes me explaining the reference, how you take it is up to you!

______________________

 

1 hour ago, Scott Robison said:

Given tone of type, I'm not sure if I've hit a nerve or not. I don't *think* so but ... sorry if necessary.



I don't think calling it LX8 is useful as it does confuse people, even if the name is clever. Commander is a brand like Commodore was a brand. Lieutenant is a clever nickname like Speccy for Spectrum.



Really, given that Commodore is higher in rank than Commander, and made less capable hardware than the X16, perhaps calling X8 the Captain would make more sense.



In any case ... it doesn't matter. I know what you're talking about. Just sharing my opinion.

But, but, but ... goddamit, I'm calling it the LX8 to be clever. 8-)# ... Heck, if they sell them and I buy one, I'll keep on calling it the LX8, I think its just that clever.

It's pretty obvious that David is calling them the X16's and X8. The board even as "X8" on it. It would be silly to try to change it's official name, but the comment to call it the Lieutenant X8 was too witty to not give it some props.

2 minutes ago, BruceMcF said:

Also, note that you have specified that the reference is to a campaign that insinuated that the left wing of the Democratic party were childish and the Democratic Leadership Council wing were the adults in the room. "It was a reference to a previous insult" makes it an even weaker excuse.

Sorry, incorrect.  It's a quote from James Carville, consulting for the Clinton campaign, which caught on quite extensively and was a factor in his victory.

from Wikipedia:

 derived from a list he (James Carville) posted in the campaign war room to help focus himself and his staff, with these three points:

1. 
   Change vs. more of the same.
   


2. 
   The economy, stupid.
   


3. 
   Don't forget health care.^[62]