Jump to content
IGNORED

The Atari Jaguar Ethernet/FLASH card


Matthias

Recommended Posts

hi,

 

This was indeed getting anoying. seeing people fight about who is right and who is wrong. :|.

 

What IF someone is wrong. than what? would you feel proud? would you get fame? i dunno :?. if you ask me. i think it is childsplay.

 

If you hate each other that much. go play quake 3 online :twisted:.

 

Hey mathias, great thing! hope that it will be finished soon. cant wait!

 

I had an few questions tough.

 

question 1. I am thinking of developing yakuza for the jag. (jaguar has been ordered and should be here in an week! jeej!!! :D ) But i was wondering about the loading times. seeing we are talking here about an grand theft auto one game (with poorer graphics, basicly because of the none polygons). And if it goes online with lets say. max 8 players. there would be an slow down right? and the loading times would take probaly very long.

 

question 2. Will it use an different os? Meaning that we cant goto www.atariage.com or something? And how will we host websites than?

 

question 3. how will we go visit websites without an keyboard. or will that not be possible?

 

keep up the good work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay guys, Matthias has created a great little piece of hardware for the Atari Jaguar and you guys are arguing about MAC addresses?

 

First, just how many of these things might actually make it into the wild?  100? 200? 300?  A miniscule percentage of hardware out there that has MAC addresses.  Second, most of these carts will be used on local networks and will never be attached to anything beyond that.  Third, even if a few of these *ARE* used to play games/surf over the internet, at worst the MAC address may be used, what, in an entire subdevelopment?  What are the odds of someone actually colliding with another MAC address in that (worst case scenario) subdevelopment?  I'd say they're pretty damn slim and certainly not worth arguing about.  

 

..Al

 

Hi Albert!

 

So, what you're saying is that if only a small number of people STEAL from you then it's okay?

 

I'm not sure if you understand what it is that you are saying, because I really don't think you are condoning theft.

 

MAC addresses are PAID FOR by the people who make hardware. To usurp a number someone else owns or may buy someday in the future is indeed stealing. I want to make sure you are clear on that before you insist that it's no problem to take any number you like.

 

The fact that there's only a small chance your stolen number will cause a network conflict is beside the point. It's a stolen number. To suggest that there's only a small chance that it will be detected is like saying that if you stole a bike that there's only a small chance that the owner would recognise it.

 

Piracy and theft is worth arguing about. It killed enough Atari machines in the past that surely Atari fans would understand the slippery slope you are advocating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I will stop with the MAC address stuff.  I am just sorry that TBird refuses to accept that he can be wrong.  Perhaps he should answer his own group of questions.  

 

Clever how you run and hide when I ask you the series of questions that if you answer them will prove you're wrong.

 

I accept your surrender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello!

And i did the tests with JAG-files like Native (~1MB): a RAM-only transfer.

Of course erasing the FLASH-ROMs need additional time, but i hope that there is no big slow-down when burning the data.

 

Flash chips are notoriously slow at programming and erase cycles. Look that the speed difference between writing to the Alpine board and to the Atari FlashROM. RAM transfers are going to be vastly superior to the Flash Speed.

 

Any chance of converting the design over to a 100Mb/S chipset? That would really up the troughput of the RAM transfers.

 

Also, are you using the CS8900 in 8 or 16-bit bus mode?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I will stop with the MAC address stuff.  I am just sorry that TBird refuses to accept that he can be wrong.  Perhaps he should answer his own group of questions.  

 

Clever how you run and hide when I ask you the series of questions that if you answer them will prove you're wrong.

 

I accept your surrender.

 

Uhh, no, maybe he read my post and decided that it was better to just drop it at this point and not let it continue, which is something you seem to have a hard time doing. At least not without getting a last jab in first. I'm really getting tired of the elitist and superior attitude you display here and on JI2.

 

..Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi!

 

Hello!

And i did the tests with JAG-files like Native (~1MB): a RAM-only transfer.

Of course erasing the FLASH-ROMs need additional time, but i hope that there is no big slow-down when burning the data.

 

Flash chips are notoriously slow at programming and erase cycles. Look that the speed difference between writing to the Alpine board and to the Atari FlashROM. RAM transfers are going to be vastly superior to the Flash Speed.

 

Sorry, i meant that the data-transfer isn't slowed down by the programming of the received data.

 

Any chance of converting the design over to a 100Mb/S chipset? That would really up the troughput of the RAM transfers.

 

I'm limited to the use of chips i can get without problems. And which are easy to understand of course.

 

Also, are you using the CS8900 in 8 or 16-bit bus mode?

 

16bit-mode.

 

Matthias

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I will stop with the MAC address stuff.  I am just sorry that TBird refuses to accept that he can be wrong.  Perhaps he should answer his own group of questions.  

 

Clever how you run and hide when I ask you the series of questions that if you answer them will prove you're wrong.

 

I accept your surrender.

 

Uhh, no, maybe he read my post and decided that it was better to just drop it at this point and not let it continue, which is something you seem to have a hard time doing. At least not without getting a last jab in first. I'm really getting tired of the elitist and superior attitude you display here and on JI2.

 

..Al

 

I'm not asking you to like me. This is not a popularity contest, and neither is JI2. I come here to answer questions and promote Atari and the Jaguar to other people who might be interested. If that means I have to correct a few stubborn people, then so be it. I'm not going to cow tow to anyone just because someone's going to dislike me.

 

If you have a problem, then the public forums are not the best place to discuss them, unless you intend to use them as a vehicle to spread dissent. You yourself wanted to talk about the Flash Ethernet Card. Why attack me instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not asking you to like me. This is not a popularity contest, and neither is JI2. I come here to answer questions and promote Atari and the Jaguar to other people who might be interested. If that means I have to correct a few stubborn people, then so be it. I'm not going to cow tow to anyone just because someone's going to dislike me.

 

When you answer questions in a straightforward manner, everyone appreciates your input. When you answer questions laced with an air of superiority and subtle (or not so subtle) jabs, you may answer the questions but you also leave a bad taste in everyone's mouths, and probably directly inflame the person you're responding to. This thread is just the latest example of a discussion you are souring. You may think you're the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I'd like to know how many people you've personally scared away from the Jaguar scene with the endless flamewars that seem to revolve around you.

 

Obviously you are quite knowledgeable about the Jaguar, nobody denies that. But your delivery of that knowledge leaves a lot to be desired.

 

..Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you answer questions in a straightforward manner, everyone appreciates your input.  When you answer questions laced with an air of superiority and subtle (or not so subtle) jabs, you may answer the questions but you also leave a bad taste in everyone's mouths, and probably directly inflame the person you're responding to.

 

I'm more than happy to answer questions in the manner in which you prefer, but when folks become inflammatory or choose to lie or dispute concrete facts is the point where I draw the line. Beating them at their own game is not only entertaining, but it keeps other misinformation spreaders in check.

 

This thread is just the latest example of a discussion you are souring.  You may think you're the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I'd like to know how many people you've personally scared away from the Jaguar scene with the endless flamewars that seem to revolve around you.

 

I'm sure that the same number of people have been attracted to the Jaguar through my efforts to stop misinformation and Jag bashing, not to mention my other smaller contributions to the Jaguar. In the end it's all a wash and the Jaguar breakes even.

 

Obviously you are quite knowledgeable about the Jaguar, nobody denies that. But your delivery of that knowledge leaves a lot to be desired.

 

If I gave up my love of Atari every time someone said they didn't like my humorous delivery, I'd never have even started Jaguar development. Besides, the people out there who "get it" know enough to stop focusing on the delivery and look for the information contained within.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello!

 

I had an few questions tough.  

 

question 1. I am thinking of developing yakuza for the jag. (jaguar has been ordered and should be here in an week! jeej!!! :D ) But i was wondering about the loading times. seeing we are talking here about an grand theft auto one game (with poorer graphics, basicly because of the none polygons). And if it goes online with lets say. max 8 players. there would be an slow down right? and the loading times would take probaly very long.

 

It might be possible to develop intranet/internet-based games using my card-design, but i have no experience with this, so I can't tell you something about loading times/slow dowsn etc.

 

question 2.  Will it use an different os? Meaning that we cant goto www.atariage.com or something? And how will we host websites than?

 

What do you mean with "Different operating system"?

The webbrowser i adapted to the card is part of the Contiki operating system.

Here is some news from Adam Dunkels (the author of Contiki) about this:

> Can Contiki currently interact with eBay-type websites?

 

I just tried browsing ebay.com with the C64 version of Contiki, and it

appears to be working, although there a few problems with the host name

resolution.

 

Placing bids and such will most likely not work, however, as it requires

encrypted communiction (SSL/HTTPS) which is not implemented in Contiki.

 

/adam

 

The Jaguar has no mass-storage-device like a harddisk or a floppy-drive,

so the "website" presented by the built in Webserver has to be put onto the FLASH-ROM.

 

question 3. how will we go visit websites without an keyboard. or will that not be possible?  

 

I have added a keyboard-driver to Contiki (the small operating system which includes the webserver) which utilizes the keypad of a normal Jaguar-joypad similar to the way a mobilephone does.

key '2' = 2,A,B,C,a,b,c

key '3' = 3,D,E,F,d,e,f

and so on.

 

Additionally there are several people working on other keyboard-solutions.

 

Regards

Matthias

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi!

 

Okay... too bad about the 10Mb limitation, but good news you are running in 16-bit mode now.

 

Some people are using are using Realtek-chips (10/100MBit), but i don't have access to these chips. It's really sad to see a complete PCI-ethernet-card for 6.90 Euro, while i have to pay much more for the CS8900a.

 

Matthias

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i did the tests with JAG-files like Native (~1MB): a RAM-only transfer.

Of course erasing the FLASH-ROMs need additional time, but i hope that there is no big slow-down when burning the data.

 

Regards

Matthias

 

Can you not us ethe Flash roms which will erase themselves with a single pulse? Or have I misread that spec? I was looking at Flash roms ages ago, and I am sure there is a certain type whihc is low voltage and could be erased with a single pulse to a pin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i did the tests with JAG-files like Native (~1MB): a RAM-only transfer.

Of course erasing the FLASH-ROMs need additional time, but i hope that there is no big slow-down when burning the data.

 

Regards

Matthias

 

Can you not us ethe Flash roms which will erase themselves with a single pulse? Or have I misread that spec? I was looking at Flash roms ages ago, and I am sure there is a certain type whihc is low voltage and could be erased with a single pulse to a pin.

 

I'm using 29F016 chips (=2048 KB), which run with +5V only, without the need for a programming-voltage (as the Intel chips on the Atari FLASH-card need), these chips have 64KB sectors. I can't use the "chip erase" command because i want to keep the content of the first bank (containing the control-software: CD-Bypass, MT-Manager, Webserver,...), so i have to issue several "sector erase" commands.

Anyhow, erasing FLASH-ROMs does need time, it is not done "immediatley".

 

Matthias

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people are using are using Realtek-chips (10/100MBit), but i don't have access to these chips. It's really sad to see a complete PCI-ethernet-card for 6.90 Euro, while i have to pay much more for the CS8900a.

 

Would it help if you got a batch of identical generic cards? OK, so desoldering all the chips would be a pain, but it would work out cheaper in the end ;)

 

Stone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry guys I will stop with the MAC address stuff.  I am just sorry that TBird refuses to accept that he can be wrong.  Perhaps he should answer his own group of questions.  

 

Clever how you run and hide when I ask you the series of questions that if you answer them will prove you're wrong.

 

I accept your surrender.

No, I was listening to the post asking us to stop.. I did say PM if you wish to continue or start another thread. I am not running and hiding. I do have answers for your questions and counter arguments for your statements. But as requested by a few people I am letting it drop.. Perhaps you should do the same, or start a thread elsewhere to continue the debate?

 

Now, lets not talk about this anymore in this thread eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I was listening to the post asking us to stop.. I did say PM if you wish to continue or start another thread.  I am not running and hiding.  I do have answers for your questions and counter arguments for your statements.  But as requested by a few people I am letting it drop.. Perhaps you should do the same, or start a thread elsewhere to continue the debate?

 

Sorry. I've already accepted your surrender, so this cannot continue.

 

It's against the Geneva Convention for me to mistreat a prisoner of war. If you are trying to escape now I can probably shoot you but the BBC would probably put some kind of anti-Thunderbird spin on that, so I ask you to quietly remain in your cell until the declaration of peace is signed.

 

Thank you for your cooperation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people are using are using Realtek-chips (10/100MBit), but i don't have access to these chips. It's really sad to see a complete PCI-ethernet-card for 6.90 Euro, while i have to pay much more for the CS8900a.

 

Would it help if you got a batch of identical generic cards? OK, so desoldering all the chips would be a pain, but it would work out cheaper in the end ;)

 

Stone

 

I guess you have never tried to desolder 100's of surface mount chips and preserve the chips for reuse. It's very tricky to do and get right without messing something up or overheating the chips.

 

Also, board houses generally won't assemble a board for you with used parts because the irregular solder on the legs leftover from removing them can screw up their soldering process.

 

It's okay for one or two samples of a board, but when you're making more than a handful, the process becomes too expensive to justify. If it costs $20 for a new part and you can buy a board for $10 and then pay $10 to have to part removed and reused, then where's the savings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm when 10/100 Mps pci cards are cheap, is it not possible to creat an adapter with an pci-bridge chip (maybe these are cheaper) then a cs8900 board. The last I bought was $74 without shipping... :-(

 

I think the idea is that Matthias already has a board designed and spent countless dollars and hours prototyping and testing it and already has to make back his initial investment to break even. If he has to go back to the start and begin all over with a different approach to the design, it will delay the release by many months and double the money he has to invest in prototyping which translates into a higher price to the customer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@matthias : I just had a quick look around on RS and they list a FastEthernet chip for £6.17 each or if you buy more than 25 £4.94 each. The part number is:

 

STE100P in an STM package. The PDF's are on RS's website for it too. but you have to register to get at them (which is free) http://www.rswww.com . I found it in the following section:

 

All products, Electronic, Semiconductors - Drivers & INterface , Trancievers, Other Transcievers

 

Not sure if it's of any use to you or of comparible price.. hopefully it's of some use to you.

 

RS arn't reknown for being the cheapest suppliers around, so you may be able to find the same elsewhere they do seem to have a very good stock of parts tho :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...