3 ms·
And that’s where you are wrong. Who builds the same product they were building 15 or 20 years ago? It never gets simpler unless what you are working on is tri
by robomartin 7y ago
And that’s where you are wrong. Who builds the same product they were building 15 or 20 years ago? It never gets simpler unless what you are working on is trivial. Technology has always been about pushing the limits.
You never have enough chip resources, speed and computing power to spin the next step up in a design, much less keep up with the state of the art in any non-trivial domain a decade or two later.
Put a different way: If you are using FPGA’s correctly they will never be like software...because that’s wasteful of resources and performance. If it’s easy and “like software” it can probably be done in software with an off-the-shelf CPU/GPU.
- ncmncm 7y agoNot true. Many, many people have so much computing power to spare they program in Python. In some cases Python isn't up to the job, and C++ on a microcontroller isn't quite, either, but a cheap FPGA could do it easily. What is true is that they don't hire you for those projects. People who have harder problems and enough money to bring you to bear do. But you are far from representative. Are they using FPGAs correctly? Who cares? They don't.
- robomartin 7y agoIt would sure help your case if you provided representative use cases. Look through Xilinx application notes and the reality of FPGA’s is very clear. It’s fine to discuss these things academically, but, as a practitioner and businessman the demarcation lines are very clear, both on technical and financial grounds.