SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Wind River going up, up, up! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brian Lempel who wrote (9446)4/4/2001 10:41:36 PM
From: Allen Benn  Respond to of 10309
 
It would seem that the potential benefits from capturing a large share of DSP powered devices dwarfs the potential of the FreeBSD movement.

The multicore argument for needing a generic DSP OS that integrates with an RTOS and shares a common toolset is compelling. It is interesting that WIND attempted developing its own DSP OS, called Wisp, years ago, but it never got any traction. There are three possible reasons for this:

1. Wisp never really got off the ground in a viable way.
2. DSP’s were then the domain of Texas Instruments, which excels in adequate software for its own DSPs.
3. DSP’s then were rarely integrated, and never integrated on a single chip – at least by other than Texas Instruments.

I agree that probably the time has come for a DSP-vendor-independent OS for DSPs, especially one that can be integrated with the leading RTOS in limitless combinations suited to modern chip design. I doubt that it “dwarfs” the potential of BSD Unix integrated with Tornado/VxWorks, for the simple reason that the latter ASPs should be much larger than DSP ASPs. While wireless devices, for example, can turn out zillions of devices, still the ASP advantage of a lot of high-end devices will prove hard to overcome.

I am perfectly willing to be wrong about this, but only if I am right that the high-end devices still will prove popular and hugely profitable.

Allen