|
For me, the criterion would be can I possibly use the MC for anything else? If so then I would definitely go the MC route. If not then I would probably use the discrete logic. The exception would be if I really wanted another thing to program and I preferred that programming to wiring up a few more components. Only you can answer that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The question isn't as philosophical. You named several practical aspects of the decision yourself and with practical aspects, it's not philisophical.
My personal choice would be an MCU. Nowadays, those things are cheap and you said yourself that this would be way more flexible. Plus, that's the way the big boys do it, less albeit more complex chip. On the other hand, if the setup is supposed to be (at least somewhat) educational, dicrete ICs are way superior as one can see what's connected to what (a shift register to a counter because of reason X) and an oscilloscope can be used to monitor the workings of the machine. With a programmed MCU, it's "signals go in, signals go out, here's the spec".
|
|
|
|
|
The problem solved by discrete logic, philosophically, is the successful amalgamation of various IO to one or more standard interface, to expand the capabilities of an existing system.
The problem solved by microcontrollers, again philosophically, is the successful amalgamation of various IO to create a standalone system.
So, it entirely depends on what you want.
If you want to use a set of radio's / sensors / mechanical parts as a standalone system, you should pick the microcontroller design.
if you want to use a set of radio's / sensors / mechanical parts as a single device in a larger overall scheme, you should pick the discrete logic design.
To be honest, I think most people default to microcontrollers, because they don't understand what they're doing.
Most IoT hardware I've seen, for example, combines microcontrollers and wireless chips.
Apart from the non-obvious stability issues arising from power-draw and overheating, it also introduces a huge attack surface for hackers and they are childishly easy to DDoS.
As a rule of thumb, I'd say:
- prototype it with microcontrollers if you want
- build it with discrete logic if you can
|
|
|
|
|
Well, there might be philosophical questions in using a Micro-controller for you project, the uController might be more powerful than the actual Computer, which to me seems wrong. However the glue logic can be a pain, would a PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) or a PLD (Programmable Logic Device) be an option these seem to have been overtaken by uControllers but would be more fitting as they are sudo hardware in my view. The main thing is the programming of the 'dang' things. Mind you to test the unit and hardware interface with a Nano...
modified 22-Jun-18 7:25am.
|
|
|
|
|
I looked at programmable logic before. There seem to be two ugly problems:
First, everything available is SMD and absolutely not fun to solder by hand.
Second, I found not a single suitable device that would work with 5V logic. The processor is a little older and could even work at 3.6 V, but only at a low clock speed. 5V tolerant inputs are the best you can hope for now. Any outputs would require awkward level shifting. Besides that, I want to keep the requirements to the power supply low. That oldschool CMOS needs only a single voltage and does not draw much of a current.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: First, everything available is SMD and absolutely not fun to solder by hand.
Too true, didn't think of that plus the programmers are costly. The glue logic is the correct way to go (mind you I would be tempted to use a uController for testing, just tried it for part of operation Cluster ![Elephant | [mastadon]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/elephant.gif) )
|
|
|
|
|
There is one task where I would prefer programmable logic. That would be for memory access and address decoding logic. If I don't want to be stuck with 64k memory, I will need something like a little MMU. Timing obviously is important here.
A fast microcontroller might also do the trick. It could buffer the selcted 64k segment internally and do all the CPU's memory requests from and to this buffer. When another memory segment is requested, it must copy thze buffer to the old segment in the RAM and reload the buffer with the content of the new segment.
The problem is to swap the buffer transparently so that the CPU never is halted or slowed down.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
The issue speed (I would have thought). You need it to be fast enough to switch in NOP operation so one way I could see of doing this is to hook up a flag to a memory address near the top of memory, if this Flag is set start the switching routine. Use a couple of NOPs to pad out and allow time to catch up, if you do this with glue logic you are tying your self to a maximum value, Programmable or uController give you the ability to expand if needed.
|
|
|
|
|
An ATTiny microcontroller chip can cost as low as $0.60 a piece, add some discretes to be able to handle any larger loads. Less work laying out circuits, and greater future flexibility than discretes alone.
just my 2 cents 
|
|
|
|
|
Why buy a 7.1 instead of a 4.1 or 5.1 (if the price difference is bearable)?
Possibilities.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
You appear to have looked at the important, to you, objective differences and found them to be the same.
If you are certain that you looked at all of those then that only leaves subjective ones. Pick the one that you 'like'. Maybe because it is fun or seems 'better' without actually objectively qualifying that (although it might because you feel it is 'easier'.)
|
|
|
|
|
Is a prefab the early adoption of an upcoming fashion trend?
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It's that time before one might be mistaken for one of the Beatles.
(That retort was really clothes to dull).
(I'm tired)
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
not what the folks(?) on Thunderbirds said/asked before they got instructions?
This internet thing is amazing! Letting people use it: worst idea ever!
|
|
|
|
|
Lennon et al before they met.
modified 21-Jun-18 16:21pm.
|
|
|
|
|
My machine (i7, 8GB Ram, SSD) began running slow a few minutes ago. I could hear the CPU fan running faster. something was going on, but I couldn't tell what. Checked running processes, nothing really eating up processor. Finally, after about 5 minutes this popped up:
https://i.stack.imgur.com/SCjNR.png^
Okay, so the Java Platform SE binary wants access through the firewall,right?
It's probably an update.
How would any non-tech user ever understand what to do in this case?
I barely know what this means and it all feels like nefarious activity.
These kind of error messages have to go away. All these advances in technology and yet we have error messages like this which require research to even understand how to deal with them.
All that work MS is doing on updates and stuff and they can't put one competent person in charge of error messages and making them understandable to users? Gaping hole!
Public v Private Networks
Also, look at that closely and you'll see that it looks like the thing already has access to public networks but now it wants access to private networks also, which seems very backwards and that whole explanation is confusing anyways. I'm sure few non-tech users even understand it.
Possible Solution
Instead of just ranting I'll offer a solution
1. Microsoft could hash the javaw.exe and whatever else is running
2. Let the user know that, yes, the exe is actually a confirmed version of the thing but we cannot guarantee it or what it does is safe, but it is likely safe.
3. Provide an interface for software which will be updating to provide a message or some kind of fingerprint that gives the user a higher level of confidence of what is going on.
It could be done.
|
|
|
|
|
why would an update need an image (.png) file
why would it look for an update on imgur?
why is a blocked access spinning up the CPU so hard?
Seriously I'd find out what was running at the time and remove it real fast,
everything is pointing to something both not right and not good.
You may also want to copy up your most important files to a thumb drive,
could be a ransomware firing up and trying to encrypt everything (if you're lucky it failed)
- that would well explain the CPU going nuts.
This internet thing is amazing! Letting people use it: worst idea ever!
|
|
|
|
|
I think the image was showing the error that popped up on his system not the image as the error.
|
|
|
|
|
d'oh!
still suspicious something spinning up the CPU and/because of trying to access the private network? blocked access wouldn't ever affect the CPU (and nor would defender stopping/reporting that).
If it looks like a turd, and smells like a turd, flush it because it probably is a turd.
This internet thing is amazing! Letting people use it: worst idea ever!
|
|
|
|
|
It is the _normal_ java update process.
That's my point though, it acts very suspiciously and there is no obvious way to differentiate between nefarious behavior and something updating something you need on your computer.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: It is the normal java update process.
So his point stands, it is a turd. 
raddevus wrote: That's my point though, it acts very suspiciously and there is no obvious way to differentiate between nefarious behavior and something updating something you need on your computer.
Gotta agree. I find it rather disconcerting that javaw.exe itself, and not a separate, dedicated update process, is the one looking for updates. Well, assuming this is what's taking place. And if that's the case, then since javaw.exe itself is doing an update check, then you'd think it has the permissions already to poke a hole in the firewall to do that and keep the firewall quiet since, as you're pointing out, the message is none too obvious for mere mortals.
Besides - what if you're ok with granting the update process permission to go out to the internet, but would still rather block the runtime from doing so? This really needs to be separated out.
Gawd...I did not need to be reminded of why I don't allow Java to get anywhere near any of my machines. Ever.
|
|
|
|
|
The firewall doesn't (generally) prevent a program from going out onto the net and downloading a file. Defender is telling you that javaw.exe is wanting to open a port to listen on, and it wants to allow access to that port from your private network.
Assuming it's legit, this does look nefarious, but more likely is that the last update (which it silently pulled through your firewall) included some peer-to-peer update mechanism, and they want other machines on your private network to contact some updater (probably implemented in Java) on this machine and pass the update along. They may even be trying to deliver their update pro-actively to machines inside your firewall that you're preventing from accessing the outside world.
As for spinning up the CPU fan? Could just be the code is in a busy wait retry loop of some sort because opening the listening port keeps failing on it (wouldn't be the first time "nefarious" SW was detected due to that failure mode).
|
|
|
|
|
I've deleted all my files and everything is fixed now.
~Posted from my iPhone.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: All these advances in technology and yet we have error messages like...
You are joking, right? We pile some stuff on lots of older stuff until someone feels like reinventing the wheel. Then we topple over the entire pile and start all over again - until someone feels like reinventing the wheel again.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
