USB programmable Open Source Hardware

Looking for interest in an Open Source Hardware USB programmable FPGA,
XC3S250E. I have been having some difficulty getting the right people
exposed to this project. If you have any interest in this project
would like to hear from you. It is headed into an Open Source Hardware
agreement therefore their is no proprietary information about the
design.

Here is an image of the board.
http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=yhjjddznzmx&thumb=5

Cy Drollinger
Electronic Realization L.L.C.
313 W. Mendenhall #5
Bozeman, MT 59715
PH: 406-586-5502
Email: cy@montana.net

On Sep 22, 10:19=A0pm, nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking for interest in an Open Source Hardware USB programmable FPGA,
> XC3S250E. I have been having some difficulty getting the right people
> exposed to this project. If you have any interest in this project
> would like to hear from you. It is headed into an Open Source Hardware
> agreement therefore their is no proprietary information about the
> design.
>
> Here is an image of the board.http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quic=
kkey=3Dyhjjddznzmx&thumb=3D5
>
> Cy Drollinger
> Electronic Realization L.L.C.
> 313 W. Mendenhall #5
> Bozeman, MT 59715
> PH: 406-586-5502
> Email: c...@montana.net

Dear Cy

who are the right people?
customers buying the hardware from you?
an OEM fab that manufacturers the board for you cheaply?
developers who spend their time to support your board so you can use
those open source projects to sell more boards and make more money?
somebody who can give you good advice?

the PCB is far too expensive to make for "open source" guys, so nobody
will build this board, unless you manufacture and sell it cheaply,
so whatever you call open source hardware, it is just an commercial
products with schematic made public, but the schematics of most FPGA
development hardware is openly public anyway, so where is you point?

you really have to say what type of contacts you are looking for!

Antti

Antti,

I enjoy your responses they are to the bone, but valid. The right
people are engineers who wish to pick this project up for their
benefit, yes antti as well as mine. The engineer would be some one
willing to pay a bit extra for one of four boards available with all
the design file associated with the boards. These files are the meat
of the work and would allow an engineer to make changes from the
current form to one more suitable to their needs, if necessary. Open
Source license also allows anyone willing to manufacture this product
for sale and profit of their own, royalty free. Development and
testing is a huge cost and has been paid for in this project. Yes,
antti schematics are available for many of the development boards but
firmware and how things are implemented are not. Digilent for example
produced a project that only required a usb to miniB connection to the
board to program utilizing Xilinx's impact program, how did they do
that? They will not tell me, I understand, but it was worth asking.

If the 4 layer printed circuit board was manufactured for $6 is that
to expensive?

My point: is placing all of this projects work in an open source
license to be easily duplicated at a reasonable cost one board under
$50.00 for someone in need of well behaved electronic signals, maybe
an engineer, a student, a hobbyist, and the like. Antti, you are so
preceptive, Yes, I would like to be able to accept notes of
appreciation for this body of work, because someone finds it helpful.
Being able to discuss this body of work and let it go out to those who
would find it useful makes me smile. Open Source Hardware licensing
just prevents anyone from strangling the work and making it theirs,
plagiarism. This body of work is not quite original but is not a rip
off, or a copy of another work. Yes, their are similar projects out
there and I have asked for help on this project from those similar
project, but understandably I got go away, I did.
I have spent my resource on this project and I need more to continue
on or even try something different.

Thanks for asking Antti,

Cy Drollinger

nobody <cydrollinger@gmail.com> wrote:

>Looking for interest in an Open Source Hardware USB programmable FPGA,
>XC3S250E. I have been having some difficulty getting the right people
>exposed to this project. If you have any interest in this project
>would like to hear from you. It is headed into an Open Source Hardware
>agreement therefore their is no proprietary information about the
>design.
>
>Here is an image of the board.
>http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=yhjjddznzmx&thumb=5

What is the purpose of the board? What needs to be done?

I see an FTDI chip. Can it be programmed through OpenOCD / serial port
JTAG?

-- 
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
                     "If it doesn't fit, use a bigger hammer!"
--------------------------------------------------------------

On Sep 23, 6:58=A0pm, nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Antti,
>
> I enjoy your responses they are to the bone, but valid. The right
> people are engineers who wish to pick this project up for their
> benefit, yes antti as well as mine. The engineer would be some one
> willing to pay a bit extra for one of four boards available with all
> the design file associated with the boards. These files are the meat
> of the work and would allow an engineer to make changes from the
> current form to one more suitable to their needs, if necessary. Open
> Source license also allows anyone willing to manufacture this product
> for sale and profit of their own, royalty free. Development and
> testing is a huge cost and has been paid for in this project. Yes,
> antti schematics are available for many of the development boards but
> firmware and how things are implemented are not. Digilent for example
> produced a project that only required a usb to miniB connection to the
> board to program utilizing Xilinx's impact program, how did they do
> that? They will not tell me, I understand, but it was worth asking.
>
> If the 4 layer printed circuit board was manufactured for $6 is that
> to expensive?
>
> My point: is placing all of this projects work in an open source
> license to be easily duplicated at a reasonable cost one board under
> $50.00 for someone in need of well behaved electronic signals, maybe
> an engineer, a student, a hobbyist, and the like. Antti, you are so
> preceptive, Yes, I would like to be able to accept notes of
> appreciation for this body of work, because someone finds it helpful.
> Being able to discuss this body of work and let it go out to those who
> would find it useful makes me smile. Open Source Hardware licensing
> just prevents anyone from strangling the work and making it theirs,
> plagiarism. This body of work is not quite original but is not a rip
> off, or a copy of another work. Yes, their are similar projects out
> there and I have asked for help on this project from those similar
> project, but understandably I got go away, I did.
> I have spent my resource on this project and I need more to continue
> on or even try something different.
>
> Thanks for asking Antti,
>
> Cy Drollinger

Cy

you havent done your homework ;)

1) Xilinx USB cable can be put on customer board (yours) the schematic
is FREELY available, FX2+CPLD, support:impact/chipscope/xmd
2) Digilent USB cable can put on customer board  (yours) the schematic
is FREELY available, FX2 only, support: chipscope/xmd

3) Anttis option:
a] FT232RL and S3E, CBUS used for CLK and JTAG, i can provide ALL
TOOLS needed for this
b] FT245RL + S3AN (uses multiboot)

a and b allow full programmability over usb, at lower cost then your,
and lower than digilent or xilinx usb embedded

all solutions are EASY and READY for anyone to benefit, and lower cost
then yours

6$ one off 4 layer PCB? you have good fab, if so!

but, you use hard to get and hard to use connectors, making also add
on boards expensive, so that reduces the interest another level

your work is 1:1 same as "console FPGA" or have i failed to see
something?
i see nothing what your board does better (both designs are WAY TOO
OLD, and WAY too expensive...)

Antti

On Sep 23, 7:17=A0pm, n...@puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote:
> nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Looking for interest in an Open Source Hardware USB programmable FPGA,
> >XC3S250E. I have been having some difficulty getting the right people
> >exposed to this project. If you have any interest in this project
> >would like to hear from you. It is headed into an Open Source Hardware
> >agreement therefore their is no proprietary information about the
> >design.
>
> >Here is an image of the board.
> >http://www.mediafire.com/imageview.php?quickkey=3Dyhjjddznzmx&thumb=3D5
>
> What is the purpose of the board? What needs to be done?
>
> I see an FTDI chip. Can it be programmed through OpenOCD / serial port
> JTAG?
>
> --
> Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
> indicates you are not using the right tools...
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0"If it doesn't fit, use a bigg=
er hammer!"
> --------------------------------------------------------------

NO

you need a JTAG cable to program the CPLD
then you can download the FPGA
much same idea as the ondemand thing

there is no "bootstrap" option that would
allow the board to be flashd with empty
CPLD and flash soldered =3D=3D=3D BAD design

Antti

On Sep 23, 11:58=A0am, nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Antti,
>
> I enjoy your responses they are to the bone, but valid. The right
> people are engineers who wish to pick this project up for their
> benefit, yes antti as well as mine. The engineer would be some one
> willing to pay a bit extra for one of four boards available with all
> the design file associated with the boards. These files are the meat
> of the work and would allow an engineer to make changes from the
> current form to one more suitable to their needs, if necessary. Open
> Source license also allows anyone willing to manufacture this product
> for sale and profit of their own, royalty free. Development and
> testing is a huge cost and has been paid for in this project. Yes,
> antti schematics are available for many of the development boards but
> firmware and how things are implemented are not. Digilent for example
> produced a project that only required a usb to miniB connection to the
> board to program utilizing Xilinx's impact program, how did they do
> that? They will not tell me, I understand, but it was worth asking.

Yes, there are vendors who do not make all of their design files
available for FPGA development boards.  But for the most part, the
FPGA makers provide development boards and make all of their design
files available.  I think they do this to reduce the amount of support
required.  If you have all of the design files, you don't need to ask
so many questions, you can just look it up yourself.  So in that
sense, there are a number of open source FPGA development boards.
Just not with the freedom to make your own copies although I can't
imagine an FPGA vendor would object since you would be putting their
parts on it!


> If the 4 layer printed circuit board was manufactured for $6 is that
> to expensive?

No one can have a board manufactured for $6.  You might be able to get
100 for $600 or possibly even 10 for $60, but not 1 for $6.  That is
one of the problems with open source hardware.  It is "hard" and often
difficult to make on your own.  But that does not need to be a
problem.  The most successful open source hardware (OSH) project I
have seen is the Beagle Board which can only be made in pretty
advanced factories.  It uses a Package on Package mounting technique
for the processor memory as the OMAP CPU used is intended for use in
PDAs and cell phone like applications.  So clearly, the fact that you
might have to sell some part or even all of the board would not doom
the project as Antti might think.  (Not trying to put words in your
mouth Antti, just making a point).

In fact, I am thinking about an open source GPS receiver project which
would require not only the electronic hardware, but also a mechanical
design be done.  Now *that* can be a problem for open source I
think.


> My point: is placing all of this projects work in an open source
> license to be easily duplicated at a reasonable cost one board under
> $50.00 for someone in need of well behaved electronic signals, maybe
> an engineer, a student, a hobbyist, and the like. Antti, you are so
> preceptive, Yes, I would like to be able to accept notes of
> appreciation for this body of work, because someone finds it helpful.
> Being able to discuss this body of work and let it go out to those who
> would find it useful makes me smile. Open Source Hardware licensing
> just prevents anyone from strangling the work and making it theirs,
> plagiarism. This body of work is not quite original but is not a rip
> off, or a copy of another work. Yes, their are similar projects out
> there and I have asked for help on this project from those similar
> project, but understandably I got go away, I did.
> I have spent my resource on this project and I need more to continue
> on or even try something different.

Have you defined your goals for this project?  If you are going to
succeed, you need to know what you are trying to do, *clearly*.
Others can give feedback on the goals and you can modify them to
include as many others as possible.  Then you will get as much support
as possible.

Rick

On Sep 23, 7:38=A0pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 23, 11:58=A0am, nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Antti,
>
> > I enjoy your responses they are to the bone, but valid. The right
> > people are engineers who wish to pick this project up for their
> > benefit, yes antti as well as mine. The engineer would be some one
> > willing to pay a bit extra for one of four boards available with all
> > the design file associated with the boards. These files are the meat
> > of the work and would allow an engineer to make changes from the
> > current form to one more suitable to their needs, if necessary. Open
> > Source license also allows anyone willing to manufacture this product
> > for sale and profit of their own, royalty free. Development and
> > testing is a huge cost and has been paid for in this project. Yes,
> > antti schematics are available for many of the development boards but
> > firmware and how things are implemented are not. Digilent for example
> > produced a project that only required a usb to miniB connection to the
> > board to program utilizing Xilinx's impact program, how did they do
> > that? They will not tell me, I understand, but it was worth asking.
>
> Yes, there are vendors who do not make all of their design files
> available for FPGA development boards. =A0But for the most part, the
> FPGA makers provide development boards and make all of their design
> files available. =A0I think they do this to reduce the amount of support
> required. =A0If you have all of the design files, you don't need to ask
> so many questions, you can just look it up yourself. =A0So in that
> sense, there are a number of open source FPGA development boards.
> Just not with the freedom to make your own copies although I can't
> imagine an FPGA vendor would object since you would be putting their
> parts on it!
>
> > If the 4 layer printed circuit board was manufactured for $6 is that
> > to expensive?
>
> No one can have a board manufactured for $6. =A0You might be able to get
> 100 for $600 or possibly even 10 for $60, but not 1 for $6. =A0That is
> one of the problems with open source hardware. =A0It is "hard" and often
> difficult to make on your own. =A0But that does not need to be a
> problem. =A0The most successful open source hardware (OSH) project I
> have seen is the Beagle Board which can only be made in pretty
> advanced factories. =A0It uses a Package on Package mounting technique
> for the processor memory as the OMAP CPU used is intended for use in
> PDAs and cell phone like applications. =A0So clearly, the fact that you
> might have to sell some part or even all of the board would not doom
> the project as Antti might think. =A0(Not trying to put words in your
> mouth Antti, just making a point).
>
> In fact, I am thinking about an open source GPS receiver project which
> would require not only the electronic hardware, but also a mechanical
> design be done. =A0Now *that* can be a problem for open source I
> think.
>
> > My point: is placing all of this projects work in an open source
> > license to be easily duplicated at a reasonable cost one board under
> > $50.00 for someone in need of well behaved electronic signals, maybe
> > an engineer, a student, a hobbyist, and the like. Antti, you are so
> > preceptive, Yes, I would like to be able to accept notes of
> > appreciation for this body of work, because someone finds it helpful.
> > Being able to discuss this body of work and let it go out to those who
> > would find it useful makes me smile. Open Source Hardware licensing
> > just prevents anyone from strangling the work and making it theirs,
> > plagiarism. This body of work is not quite original but is not a rip
> > off, or a copy of another work. Yes, their are similar projects out
> > there and I have asked for help on this project from those similar
> > project, but understandably I got go away, I did.
> > I have spent my resource on this project and I need more to continue
> > on or even try something different.
>
> Have you defined your goals for this project? =A0If you are going to
> succeed, you need to know what you are trying to do, *clearly*.
> Others can give feedback on the goals and you can modify them to
> include as many others as possible. =A0Then you will get as much support
> as possible.
>
> Rick

Rick,

beagle is:
1) backed up by TI
2) uses (used) newest components

Cy's design:
1) uses OBSOLETED and NFND components

see the difference?

Cy: doing something different is an option

And as before i am failing to see what you expect to find?

I can only sayd that no "open source" developer will be
ordering and assembling those boards for personal use
and no company is interested to produce them either

so if somebody makes the boards its only you, and then
you have boards with 2 generation too old FPGA that
nobody is interested in, and that you can not sell even
for break even

Antti

Antti,

You have it all figured dont ya, Nobody, nothing, no company, no
interest. Well, seems as if two others have joined in to express some
interest.

 I agree the mating components, 4 connectors, used on the board for
stacking the boards are expensive and therefore need to rethink
that.

There is an SPI flash in the lower right hand of that picture, which I
have used to boot load, yes it was programmed with the Xilinx platform
Cable USB II and the impact software. I do believe that the hardware
is in place to allow a file to be copied into the flash through the
USB, CPLD, FPGA. Add power from a walwart and the FPGA is up and
running. I am not all together convinced that this can not become a
multiboot system, however it is not spoken about in either XAPP951 or
XAPP974.

Rick,

I did not see the problem for your electrical and mechanical designs
of the GPS receiver. When the design is done and all is working
clients merely order the mechanical component order the electrical
component put it together. If there is need for something different
all design file are available for the next design, who ever it may be.
Clear goals: Yes, agreed. I have met my initial goals: an operable usb
powered and programmable fpga with a couple of addition for usability.
Now what? Well as antti has so strongly points out no one wants this
thing. Well, i have it, I am in need of it, and I do not want to
purchase any of antti products, or anyone elses, for any of my
contracted work, not that I have alot. I need some help in putting
together something a bit more robust and engineering friendly,
friendly to me and future work. I do not want to put something
together that does everything just gets far enough along that I can
work on the customers specifics. I can not be the only one in this
situation, therefore I want to work with a group of like minded
engineers to establish a good off the shelf component for future use.
Now, I'm not selfish I would like to share and make all of it
available, I like what happened to audrino it is a nice little 16 bit
processor. FPGA's do not suffer this identity crisis, 8 bit 32 bit
processors or whatever the hardware can be reconfigured to be. I need
it and want it. This board is only to say that I have the ability is
anyone else interested, well, the internet is good enough to house a
loose collection of engineers for a small project.

Nico,
What yet needs to be done, that's easy just look over Antti posts and
wherever he says no, not, cant, doesnt, neight just solve those
problems. Just because antti says no, not, cant, doesnt, neight does
not make it so.

Anyways- thanks for taking time to post and give me some ideas.

Cy Drollinger

On Sep 23, 10:41=A0pm, nobody <cydrollin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Antti,
>
> You have it all figured dont ya, Nobody, nothing, no company, no
> interest. Well, seems as if two others have joined in to express some
> interest.
>
> =A0I agree the mating components, 4 connectors, used on the board for
> stacking the boards are expensive and therefore need to rethink
> that.
>
> There is an SPI flash in the lower right hand of that picture, which I
> have used to boot load, yes it was programmed with the Xilinx platform
> Cable USB II and the impact software. I do believe that the hardware
> is in place to allow a file to be copied into the flash through the
> USB, CPLD, FPGA. Add power from a walwart and the FPGA is up and
> running. I am not all together convinced that this can not become a
> multiboot system, however it is not spoken about in either XAPP951 or
> XAPP974.
>
> Rick,
>
> I did not see the problem for your electrical and mechanical designs
> of the GPS receiver. When the design is done and all is working
> clients merely order the mechanical component order the electrical
> component put it together. If there is need for something different
> all design file are available for the next design, who ever it may be.
> Clear goals: Yes, agreed. I have met my initial goals: an operable usb
> powered and programmable fpga with a couple of addition for usability.
> Now what? Well as antti has so strongly points out no one wants this
> thing. Well, i have it, I am in need of it, and I do not want to
> purchase any of antti products, or anyone elses, for any of my
> contracted work, not that I have alot. I need some help in putting
> together something a bit more robust and engineering friendly,
> friendly to me and future work. I do not want to put something
> together that does everything just gets far enough along that I can
> work on the customers specifics. I can not be the only one in this
> situation, therefore I want to work with a group of like minded
> engineers to establish a good off the shelf component for future use.
> Now, I'm not selfish I would like to share and make all of it
> available, I like what happened to audrino it is a nice little 16 bit
> processor. FPGA's do not suffer this identity crisis, 8 bit 32 bit
> processors or whatever the hardware can be reconfigured to be. I need
> it and want it. This board is only to say that I have the ability is
> anyone else interested, well, the internet is good enough to house a
> loose collection of engineers for a small project.
>
> Nico,
> What yet needs to be done, that's easy just look over Antti posts and
> wherever he says no, not, cant, doesnt, neight just solve those
> problems. Just because antti says no, not, cant, doesnt, neight does
> not make it so.
>
> Anyways- thanks for taking time to post and give me some ideas.
>
> Cy Drollinger

there is no failsafe multiboot in S3E

just another reason never use something as old as S3E

Antti
PS I am not as negative just trying to help you,
and yes i have pretty much figured out