In few words, describe how you see XMOS

Off topic discussions that do not fit into any of the above can go here. Please keep it clean and respectful.
User avatar
octal
XCore Addict
Posts: 228
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 3:30 pm
Location: Argenteuil - France
Contact:

In few words, describe how you see XMOS

Post by octal »

Well, this post is a trial to answer some questions about positining XMOS devices.
c.f. these threads
https://www.xcore.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1124
https://www.xcore.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=1104

What do you think describe best XMOS thingy?


Some :ugeek: on twitter are proposing to call it : Event Driven MTU (don't confuse it with MCU) !

Event Driven MTU = Event Driven Micro Transputer Unit

what do you suggest ?


User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

Good post octal

I think One of the other variants ideas was TCU - TransputerControl Unit but againg we are missing event driven. so perhaps Event Driven TCU is another candidate

The advantage of both of these would be folks thinking what is an MTU or TCU. So if it was actually a hyperlink it could shown it means its an FPGA/DSP/Multiprocessor/MCU all in one at the same time, a completely new kind of device with a whole new agile development experience.

regards
Al
User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

Another TLA could be RPU- Realtime Processing Unit, something which XS1 is very good at.

But even 'Unit' is misleading perhaps 'Concurrency' would be better - RPC but that means something else already (Remote Procedure Call) so how about CREP - Concurrent Realtime Event Processor, not an LTA rather an FLA. perhaps someone else can mix these for something better?

regards
Al
User avatar
jonathan
Respected Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:07 pm
Contact:

Post by jonathan »

Whatever class XMOS creates for itself (it previously tried with "software-defined silicon" by the way, but pulled this branding fairly quickly), the class must contain more than one company or product, otherwise XMOS will be the only fish in its own, muddy puddle.

Until you have defined "X" (SDS, EDMTU, etc), you cannot be "the best at X", so creating X is the first step. Once you're the leader in X, you won't have this positioning problem any more, as you can just say "we're the best in the world at X" and people will know what you're talking about.

The bigger picture here - and the more important one - is to identify a class of devices out there to which XMOS belongs, possibly including new ARM-FPGA designs or DSP-MCU designs. It doesn't even really matter if the terminology exactly matches what XMOS is or does - as long as XMOS is cutting-edge competitive in the new space.

Moreover, to make this "new class" stick, joint-messaging with potential "new class" competitors and customers is likely to be extremely important.
Image
User avatar
tautic
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:10 pm
Contact:

Post by tautic »

Seems that "Microprocessor" could be an appropriate term. "integrated circuit semiconductor chip that performs the bulk of the processing and controls the parts of a system" according to: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/we ... oprocessor

Best Regards,

Jayson
User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

Jonathan you are spot on, XMOS has the opportunity to define a new market here. Competition will legitimise and help develop (grow) it.

regards
Al
User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

Jonathan to play on your fish analogy further, Xmos by positioning it's XS1 as an MCU, is confining its salmon in a farm pen, rather than exploiting the opportunity provided by the vast wild rivers and seas of its natural habitat.

regards
Al
User avatar
tautic
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 4:10 pm
Contact:

Post by tautic »

It's certainly "fishy" to call something, something it isn't .. and creates unnecessary confusion. But at the same time, how do I know I need this cool new silicon, if all I've been using are MCUs or FPGAs without letting the description fall into those categories. It really is a form of market education, and needs to be handled extremely carefully else there is risk of it sounding limited.
User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

I think XMOS should be the one throwing down the gauntlet and calling the shots. bending down to the other's levels put XS1 at a disadvantage. Xmos should be creating the market on their own terms and challenging others to come and compete. They could do this by picking on specific areas like DSP+MCU and FPGA+MCU and other such realtime processing challenges that XS1 can eat for its breakfast.

regards
Al
User avatar
Folknology
XCore Legend
Posts: 1274
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:20 pm
Contact:

Post by Folknology »

I think the market opportunity isn't pure FPGA or pure MCU, rather its the applications in between that need realtime event processing and concurrency. Currently this market is fulfilled using multiple device combinations rather than single devices. XS1 changes that forever, this is why it is a completely new product segment IMHO. It requires education and lead by example, not over simplified, lazy positioning and messaging in an attempt to squeeze it into the wrong market.

regards
Al
Post Reply