LX Navigation Introduces the New LX 9090 Zeus

wrote:
I do not know why you compare procesor in Zeus with new procesors in Mobile Phones.

If you're interested, why don't you ask why I do that?

If you had asked, here's the answer I would have given:

ARMv7 is state of the art, it's common and cheap. When ARMv5 was
sold, desktop computers had PentiumII CPUs. It's deprecated
technology, just like the P2 is deprecated.

A product based on ARMv7 may be overpowered now, and ARMv5 may (or may
not) be enough now; but in two years, you may want new firmware with
new features. New features will consume more CPU, and the old ARMv5
may not be powerful enough. With an ARMv5, you'll have to buy a new
instrument, while the ARMv7 will survive a few more years. Don't
build new products with deprecated technology.

So why do I compare mobile phones with the Zeus?

- CPUs in mobile phones are a good showcase for current mobile CPU
technology, and CPUs in mobile phones are designed for similar tasks
as the Zeus (GPS navigation).

- my mobile phone runs XCSoar, which makes the Zeus and my phone very
comparable.

- there is no technical reason why a flight instruments for thousands
of dollars should have ridiculously outdated hardware compared to
contemporary phones.

(Note that Ales has clarified meanwhile that the Zeus does have an
ARMv7 CPU, contrary to what he wrote first; what I know for sure is
that the LX MiniMap has ARMv5)

If you have written application for specific hardware it does not
matter what processor is inside, if peformance is good.

Will the performance still be good after the next firmware update?

I do not know where your problem is Max...?

Is that a question? And why do you think I have a problem?

Max

Max,

On Feb 14, 10:25*am, Max Kellermann wrote:

A product based on ARMv7 may be overpowered now, and ARMv5 may (or may
not) be enough now; but in two years, you may want new firmware with
new features. *New features will consume more CPU, and the old ARMv5
may not be powerful enough.

Perhaps because it's not part of their business model.

The navigation devices we're talking about offer a number of
advantages, such as
running as-is (out of the box), tested, serviced and guaranteed
function of hard and software combination and high reliability. If
these features can be realized, using newer, more expensive hardware
will reduce the profit margin. Newer devices will be sold in the
future, with new hardware and software. How else would they profit
(and fund further developments)?

It seems to me that the number of makers of great soaring instruments
fails to realized the efficiencies of mass-production.

The availability of Android devices with absolutely fantastic
displays, and my desire to be able to upgrade the software in the
future, and the great functionality and flexibility provided by XCSoar
proves the advantages of the alternative. But that's not a
"business" rather than a dynamic eco-system of talented software
developers and mass-market hardware. I hope that more integrators
will be able to market and service devices that use cheap mass-market
hardware, have optimized sensors, and run upgradable, free and open-
source software.