| ??? 02/20/08 15:35 Read: times |
#151209 - Simple Distributed Concept Responding to: ???'s previous message |
There are advantages to each technique to be sure. I like to suggest the 8 and 16 bit I2C solutions because it seems to strike a good balance toward placing the I/Os near their targeted usage area and density of PC board traces needed to hook them up. Anytime you have a single device that has dozens of pins that "go everywhere" on a board you have a much more challenging job on your hands to prepare the artwork design and provide proper isolations.
Michael Karas |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| lots of i/o | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| There are 16-bit Expanders | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The + and - of the slave processor | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the logical solution is to ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Roll 'yer own, and get exactly what you want | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| why bother | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| you're right, if "conventional" I/O ports are OK | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Max 7301 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| lots of i/o part 2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Theres a 40way NXP I/O expander | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Simple Distributed Concept | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| very valid point | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| For sure.....the multi-port job.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| lots of i/o part 3 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I love slave processors | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
MCP23008 | 01/01/70 00:00 |