On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Gordan Bobic <gor...@bobich.net> wrote:
> I still think that putting NAND on for the sake of putting NAND on just > because it's cheap is a false economy. Given it isn't replaceable, it would > have to, IMO, offer very substantial performance benefits compared to the > easily replaceable alternatives (i.e. SD/uSD card). i take your point, gordan, but there really is no comparison: up to a 500mhz bus, 8x chip-select lines and 32-bit addressing (not 1x chip-select and only 50mhz) it's going to scream along so fast, even with cheap-and-cheerful NAND ICs that i'm actually concerned about staying within the 3.5 watt passive-cooled power budget. let me see what they can get, then get the datasheets, see what happens ok? if it's rubbish, well these ICs are interchangeable to a large extent, it's not the end of the world. l. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAPweEDwwR3V0xjrPvZuv=8Lah55QEiVZh4um=bbnfavxzzp...@mail.gmail.com
