🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1a0eatINNcs2@agate.berkeley.edu> izumi@pinoko.berkeley.edu  
(Izumi Ohzawa) writes:
> 
> Personally, I believe NeXT should continue to put DSP on every NeXT.
> 
> However, if it has to be left off from the base configuration in
> the future non-68040 machine, please at least make sure that the DSP
> can be added later to every NeXT they ship, and snddriver functions
> work the same way on all the machines.
> 
> I think most would agree that being able to add it when needed is
> very important, even if you don't have an immediate need for it.
> DSP is not something you can connect to the SCSI port.
> 

Well it looks to me that the direction the sound driver (and kit) has  
taken in 3.0 is precisely for this purpose.

I for one wouldn't mind seeing an alternative to the 56001 surface. It's  
not exactly a state of the art DSP chip anymore. Technology is shifting  
too. We're starting to see more general purpose processors that CAN be  
used for high-speed stream oriented operations, and a whole lot more.  
They're even accessible from high-level languages. As long as we can do  
the same THINGS (perhaps even better) I don't care what exact chip it  
happens on. And I personally have an amount invested in code for the  
56001.

I do however think it would be important to maintain a similar hardware  
interface to the processor, since there is already a decent number of  
third-party devices that hook up to it. And a lot of 'em are pretty cool.

Gordon


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------