Why two versions? What about merging both into one?

[timofonic]

Hello.

Why two versions, one using a CPLD and other using a PIC? What about merging both into one?

Maybe a new design can be done, that can be used both for USB or SD. There are PICs that has USB built in, there are USB stacks for CPLDs or FPGAs I think.

What's the reason of having two designs into one? Is being considered to merging both?

This is something I wanted to ask some months ago...

Regards.

[Jeff]

Hello.

Why two versions, one using a CPLD and other using a PIC? What about merging both into one?

Maybe a new design can be done, that can be used both for USB or SD. There are PICs that has USB built in, there are USB stacks for CPLDs or FPGAs I think.

What's the reason of having two designs into one? Is being considered to merging both?

This is something I wanted to ask some months ago...

Regards.

Because :
1-> Cost reasons.
2-> PIC USB stack are too slow and USB PIC18 doesn't have enough memory (2KB against 4KB).

Why do you want merge this 2 designs ?

[timofonic]

Well, maybe some people like me might be interested in both options into the same device. Say it want to choose the way to use it.

Anyway, it could be nice if merging both PCB designs in some way, so the PCB makers out there could serve both versions using the same PCB

Is a CPLD more expensive than a PIC? Aren't there PICs with hardware USB support?

[CrazyIcecap]

There ARE USB PICs, but:

2-> PIC USB stack are too slow and USB PIC18 doesn't have enough memory (2KB against 4KB).

The CPLD version also lacks write support; but for write support we would need another CPLD with more gates. But those are all TQFP & similar, no more PLCC, and i really don't want to try and solder a 100+ pin TQFP chip by hand. The FT245 still gives me nightmares....

[timofonic]

OK, but I did think the main reason of the USB being slow is because using a USB stack. Maybe there are PICs with built-in USB support by hardware, so it may be a lot faster.

[CrazyIcecap]

Still doesn't solve the memory issue.

[timofonic]

Sorry if I didn't explain it correctly.

I mean still having both different versions, but using the same PCB.

This could make the production of both different models easier, as those small batches done by people can be used for the two models.

[timofonic]

PIC32MX360512 has 80Mhz, 1.5DMIPS/MHZ, a 5 stage pipe, 32 bit ALU and 32k RAM. It works with USB 2.0 at 12M. $7.65 in qty 1.

Isn't this enough?

[Jeff]

PIC32MX360512 has 80Mhz, 1.5DMIPS/MHZ, a 5 stage pipe, 32 bit ALU and 32k RAM. It works with USB 2.0 at 12M. $7.65 in qty 1.

Isn't this enough?

mhh, is it in dip/dil or plcc package ?
There are a lot of uC more powerfull than PIC18F but unfortunately few are in a package that can be solder by everyone.

[timofonic]

I see they are usually in TQFP, but there are versions adapted to more easy to solder packages.

I see many companies sell adapted versions of this chip for bigger packages, even microchip sells it.

There's one for a development board in microchipdirect, the part number is MA320001 and there are other that looks more or less the same named MA320002. Both costs $25USD per unit.

I may ask later about this, maybe chinese guys sell this stuff a lot more cheaper.

EDIT: HERE is something I found on ebay. I'll find better in this day and ask some people

[Jeff]

I see they are usually in TQFP, but there are versions adapted to more easy to solder packages.

I see many companies sell adapted versions of this chip for bigger packages, even microchip sells it.

There's one for a development board in microchipdirect, the part number is MA320001 and there are other that looks more or less the same named MA320002. Both costs $25USD per unit.

I may ask later about this, maybe chinese guys sell this stuff a lot more cheaper.

EDIT: HERE is something I found on ebay. I'll find better in this day and ask some people

this kind of adapter is only ok for a prototype, not for a batch production.

[Jeff]

OK, but I did think the main reason of the USB being slow is because using a USB stack. Maybe there are PICs with built-in USB support by hardware, so it may be a lot faster.

the problem is the software not the hardware! : free pic usb windows driver are too slow and buggy ! and i don't talk about the linux driver...

i really don't understand why do you want merge this two designs. this will cost more than actual design.
And i don't want waste my time to reinvent the wheel ( i have already past too much time on this project and i don't want restart it from 0).