Ah, that explains why there is so much electronics in the cartridge! It seemed a bit like overkill, but returning the cartridge will get them their data.
You might be interested in structured ASICs, which allow for substantial reuse of masks between different products. At the extreme was a via-only definition product where all interconnects were specified with one mask (and the via masks were among the cheapest to make since they are very uniform).
In regular ASIC development, we've had extra unrouted transistors available to wire in case of a mistake (so hopefully the respin involved just some new metal layers). Techniques like FIB can be used to test fixes to lower the number of respins, too. I'm not sure how much of this was automated to maximize chances of being useful.
Not OP, but I looked in to this a few years ago. It was more expensive then, and only went to 20 kHz. Higher frequencies are helpful if you're listening for the hiss of leaking gas, or corona discharge of an electric arc.
The Orin has 6xI2S ports internally, so that would work up to 16*6 = 96 microphones, which is a good number. But it looks like maybe only 3 are brought out & on different dev board connectors [1]? As with a lot of design, the devil is in the details. An FPGA could be easier to configure if you need more than 96 microphones.
The testing for aerospace is extremely rigorous ... For DO-178C level A (Catastrophic failure that can cause a crash or many fatal injuries) we're estimating 2 years to do MC/DC test coverage metric of a fairly basic software system that has two mechanical backups. And that's above and beyond the extensive unit tests.
The main thing that gets checked is the worst-case timing analysis for every branch condition. And there are stack monitors to monitor if the stack is growing in size.
Look at Rapita System's website for more info ... we don't use them, but they explain it well.
Originally it was because iMessages were free, while SMS were $0.15-$0.20 each. So glad Apple broke that monopoly, along with many other anti-consumer wireless provider restrictions.
Did Apple really break that monopoly? WhatsApp was released 2009 with the explicit pitch that it was "free SMS". iMessage launched 2011, and with the anti-consumer Apple lock-in, and isn't even much used outside US.
Also free/unlimited SMS was prevalent in many countries before WhatsApp or iMessage. And there were plenty of IMs before that too.
hexdump will automatically does "squeezing" of repeated lines. Follow this with a line count and multiply by the bytes/line and you'll get a rough number of non-repetitive bytes.
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/hexdump.1.html
- GPS positioning is more accurate if the satellites it sees come from a variety of angles (GDOP), so the satellites near the horizon are valuable.
- Aircraft pitch and roll, so a fixed antenna like this would lose precision as it turns to make an approach - just about the worst possible time.
It's difficult to make an antenna with a sharp cutoff to limit the ground vs. above-ground. So, most anti-jammers will use beamforming to cancel out interference in one or more specific directions. So, the null in the antenna moves to follow the interference.
>the console manufacturer is actually adding significant value and taking a fair (or not so fair) margin in exchage.
I don't get this. What does a game console manufacturer do that Apple does not? Both provide hardware, system-level APIs, dev systems, developer support, customers. In the old days, game manufacturers didn't even provide a sales channel.
And when you say Apple provides nothing, my above list is pretty solid. In the old days, developer margins were way slimmer, with physical stores taking a 50% cut on top of the console licensing fees and physical manufacturing.
> What does a game console manufacturer do that Apple does not?
Take it to the other extreme: what does a PC manufacturer do that Apple does not? Why not let Windows close down and take 30% on any program installed on Windows? Or go along with its old plans to enforce only signed Windows Store apps to be installed on Windows 12?
It's ultimately just history and culture. We consider general purpose computing to be open and specialized computing to be closed. Apple wants to keep claiming it's just a phone when in reality it's basically a PC. They even unified their hardware so that Mac and IOS run on the same architecture; hardware and software wise there isn't much a mac can do that an iPhone can't do.
> Take it to the other extreme: what does a PC manufacturer do that Apple does not? Why not let Windows close down and take 30% on any program installed on Windows?
I mean, why not? They did so in the past (Windows 10 S).
I think it turned out to be a terrible business move on Microsoft's part that didn't pan out, but why would it be regulated against now?
>I mean, why not? They did so in the past (Windows 10 S).
probably because they don't want to bring up old wounds regarding antitrust. 10 S was trying to go around it by more or less making a mobile device with some desktop functionality. Worked out about as well as Windows 10 mobile.
>but why would it be regulated against now?
well, IOS is being regulated against now, so there's your reason.
They create dedicated hardware designed to excel at gaming and then sell it at or near cost. In a very real sense they create the market that games producers sell into, and the business model is explicitly centered around those software sales. They participate in marketing, branding, etc. There's a genuine holistic value exchange that happens. Apple's value exchange is almost negative. They invest nothing in gaming as an industry, charge a premium for the hardware and then add burdensome restrictions on how the software is delivered. And then they try to take the same cut that authentic gaming ecosystem players have as their whole revenue source.
> They create dedicated hardware designed to excel at gaming and then sell it at or near cost. In a very real sense they create the market that games producers sell into, and the business model is explicitly centered around those software sales.
So like Apple releasing the iPhone, increasing graphics performance by double-digit percentages consistently year after year?
> They participate in marketing, branding, etc. There's a genuine holistic value exchange that happens.
You would need to give me examples for non-AAA games of console makers providing exceptional value here. My understanding is that this is primarily the role of the publisher, not the console maker.
Apple does showcase _certain_ apps on stage at keynotes, during commercials, with prime placement on the App Store, promoting special events, and so on. This is the level of promotion that I'm used to with game consoles as well.
> Apple's value exchange is almost negative. They invest nothing in gaming as an industry, charge a premium for the hardware and then add burdensome restrictions on how the software is delivered.
What is Playstation's big investment into gaming as an industry, if not for the hardware and the platform creating an ecosystem for games the same way iPhone/iOS have?
Microsoft created DirectX the same way Apple created and promoted Metal. Could you elaborate on the differences?
> And then they try to take the same cut that authentic gaming ecosystem players have as their whole revenue source.
Yes, could you elaborate on what additional work console makers have done here to justify their cut that Apple hasn't?
Kind of... Windows itself actually has zero native support for Vulkan, it's all implemented through backdoor APIs exposed by the three major graphics drivers. In practice that works well enough in Win32, but it doesn't work at all in the UWP sandbox, so if UWP had succeeded in the way Microsoft wanted it to then Vulkan would be locked out. Luckily UWP was a complete flop.
Apple make a huge profit on the iPhone, they make back R&D costs and then some, just from hardware sale. The same cannot be said for the game console industry. Don't be disingenuous.
