1 |
>> With that kind of processing power and DVI & HDMI out, I |
2 |
>> had a hard time believing there is no SATA native |
3 |
>> or hacked hardware solution. |
4 |
> |
5 |
> I think you'll have to believe it. :) SATA requires transceivers |
6 |
> in about the same class as DVI/HDMI. I can certainly imagine that |
7 |
> only one set of transceivers would fit the chip area/price point, |
8 |
> and I think graphics was the right choice in that case. |
9 |
|
10 |
It's a SOC so I sure things could be reshuffled to get a |
11 |
sata bus interface. Dropping the video is an excellent idea |
12 |
for a mini server! |
13 |
|
14 |
|
15 |
>> It's intended for mobile, so why not support sata (for laptop size HD)? |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I think it's too "clunky" for the intentions of the OMAP. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> And using a mechanical device in a mobile project is a bad idea. SSDs |
20 |
> sure, but they are only an afterthought since many devices already use |
21 |
> hard drives. If making a new platform or a new device, then best not |
22 |
> go that route, better use the flash controller and some NAND. |
23 |
|
24 |
You've got to be kidding me? I posted on Gentoo user a few |
25 |
days ago (NOV 8th) about a netbook. The resounding number |
26 |
one issue is avoid SSD and get a mechanical HD! |
27 |
<from a pretty smart person> |
28 |
"Those SSDs are shite. Get a mechanical drive. 8G is also |
29 |
not enough and the write performance is pathetic. " |
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
>> Hard to believe that was missed or is not forthcoming, imho. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> Maybe someone will make a SATA daughterboard, but since there's no |
35 |
> PCI bus it would have to be based on one of the USB->SATA chipsets |
36 |
> which are all pretty crappy. It could certainly be done though. |
37 |
|
38 |
USB 3.0 maybe, usb2.0 no way I would go that route. Besides |
39 |
it just adds a layer of crap that is unnecessary.... |
40 |
> |
41 |
> |
42 |
|
43 |
> Chip Block Diagram |
44 |
> http://focus.ti.com/en/graphics/wtbu/OMAP4430_zoom.jpg |
45 |
> |
46 |
|
47 |
I saw that. Like I said NO SATA? hard to believe.... |
48 |
that's my gut reaction! (and I'm an embedded hardware type).... |
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
>> Much of the information and docs are just too new |
52 |
>> to be complete. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Most of TIs docs are nearly two years old. |
55 |
> |
56 |
|
57 |
I see plenty of docs that are a few days/weeks old |
58 |
related to this panda board and TI's commitment to |
59 |
OMAP and open source BSPs. |
60 |
|
61 |
|
62 |
>> No doubt, since the gerbers et. al. exist, it wont be long before |
63 |
>> somebody puts a SATA bus interface, to this project. |
64 |
> |
65 |
> I guess the ease of a $15 USB->SATA converter will mean most don't |
66 |
> bother. |
67 |
|
68 |
Hmn. I think this board will get re-spun loosing the video |
69 |
and adding a sata port(s) and connectors (as you have |
70 |
pointed out). That way you could house the board and a hard |
71 |
drive into a mini box and put lots of parallel servers to |
72 |
work. Easy to power up and down (at least the drive) to make |
73 |
it very power efficient or to cluster. |
74 |
|
75 |
|
76 |
> Hehe. I wouldn't trust SATA drives for critical things. But I |
77 |
> certainly agree that Cortex-A will reach into the server market! |
78 |
|
79 |
Sata is fine, particularly with technologies such as CEPH |
80 |
and others coming of age. Many dual core A9's and lots of |
81 |
cheap ram and sata drives will rule! I'm redesigning a |
82 |
video cluster for a large agency based on this new stuff! |
83 |
Sata + pandaboard is exactly what we've been looking for! |
84 |
|
85 |
|
86 |
(mi_Liege) |
87 |
;-) ;-) ;-) |
88 |
james |