Main Board Wiring
This question/topic is regarding the main board in which all accessory tiles/attachments are connected to.I am curious to know how exactly it is being planned to wire the main board. With the (possible) variation of tiles that will vary in size and shape, it means that one could, realistically, put the CPU on the top corner, the middle, etc., along with all other components. With this, I see the possible problem of how the main board itself would be wired: with all the position possibilities of each block, essentially we would have to see that every single ‘hole’ (connection point) on the board is connected to every other one, so as that larger units can still communicate as necessary across a larger ‘hole’ span.Whether this would implement communication errors between various pieces of attached hardware (as they could/would essentially cross-wire), I am wondering if this is something that will be taken care of on the software side of things, or if there will be some specific designated zones that should only be used for specific attachments?Let the discussion begin…
I think you’re absolutely right to be concerned with the design and construct of the base, tyler:it’s the key to the success of the project imo.Elsewhere I proposed a graphene / plastic ply, that might carry the current (and act as a battery (well, capacitor) extention actually).The original concept looked as if it was Golden Ratio:the bloks are going to be limited to specific sizes whatever proportions are chosen, but knowing they come in 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, units *might* make the I/O ports easier to place.
“Might” is the key word as far as I’m concerned, and I agree with what you have to say. It is still a bit unclear as to what the intentions are for the heart of the unit: there has to be a… motherboard of the sorts.. in the unit. So that is where I expect that it will be the Base that is the essential motherboard for the device. A lot of small tech is going to have to be packed into this Base, and that would admittedly increase its size as more realized additional (but necessary) pieces are added. It would be interesting to put together of few of us and come up with a centralized, ideal solution for this – I don’t think the regular person would understand the problem this Base could cause without proper preparation and planning (and without a doubt, execution) —–For those who aren’t familiar with this, think of it this way: If you wanted to upgrade your storage, but the storage was also the heart of the unit, like iOS 7 or Android KitKat, you wouldn’t want to have to buy a larger storage unit, install that OS, tweak it how you had it, re-download some essential programs, etc., would you? No, you would much rather have the storage act as what your current MicroSD card does in your phone – an extension of storage, but the core of your phone, and the tweaks you have made, remain unscathed. ——EDIT: From the video and small bits of information I have gathered, it appears the Base is just a passive unit that simply transfers the electrical currents from piece to piece. I hope this isn’t the case, as it definitely needs to be an active board if simplicity for the customer is what is wanting to be achieved. The thought then comes in that the Base would also have to be wired with future-proof in mind.
Totally agree that the base needs to be “active”.It needs to be realised in as astonishingly simple a way as possible too, if obselescence is to be avoided (the raison d’être of the project).
Is it possible for each component to generate a unique id signal when powered, so that the motherboard can identify it ?
Well I guess it’s possible. It would add bulk though. What have you got in mind cristikaszta?
It was a curious question. I thought that it is the way in which the motherboard can identify the components regardless of where they are placed. Is there a simpler solution to this ?
Entirely my fault! I hadn’t fully comprehended what you were saying: that there needs to be some sort of ‘component signature’ in front of the data as it goes into the CPU… Surely that could be a coded Key?
Yes, that’s what I was trying to point out.
🙂 an excellent point.
https://discuss.phonebloks.com/forum/view_topic/1/536/Hardware-development/Hardware-IdeaA Standardised IC Circuit
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.