FPGA Exchange

G

Guy Eschemann

Guest
I'd like to introduce a new FPGA discussion forum. It's called FPGA Exchange, and you can check it out at: http://fpga-exchange.com

Feel free to jump in, create new topics, or answer existing ones.

Guy.
 
Guy Eschemann <Guy.Eschemann@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd like to introduce a new FPGA discussion forum. It's called
FPGA Exchange, and you can check it out at: http://fpga-exchange.com

Feel free to jump in, create new topics, or answer existing ones.
Any reason for trying to split up the community?

--
Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
 
On 6/24/2013 5:20 AM, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
Guy Eschemann <Guy.Eschemann@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd like to introduce a new FPGA discussion forum. It's called
FPGA Exchange, and you can check it out at: http://fpga-exchange.com

Feel free to jump in, create new topics, or answer existing ones.

Any reason for trying to split up the community?

Time will tell if fpga-exchange will offer new or better discussions.

There is always room for a new kid, lets see if it lasts.

hamilton
 
I get a message "Unfortunately, your browser is too old to work on thi
Discourse forum. Please upgrade your browser."
The IT Department here determine what browser I use, so I won't b
contributing.



---------------------------------------
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com
 
Hello RCIngham,

sorry to hear that. FPGA Exchange is built on a platform that makes heavy use of JavaScript, so the minimum browser requirements are quite high:

- Internet Explorer 10+
- Google Chrome 24+
- Firefox 14+
- Safari 5+

As the aim is to create a discussion forum for the next decade of programmable logic, we unfortunately cannot support older browsers.

Guy Eschemann
Ingenieurbüro ESCHEMANN
Am Sandfeld 17a
76149 Karlsruhe, Germany

Tel.: +49 (0) 721 170 293 89
Fax: +49 (0) 721 170 293 89 - 9

Guy.Eschemann@gmail.com
Follow me on Twitter: @geschema
http://noasic.com
NEW: http://fpga-exchange.com
http://fpga-news.de
 
On 6/25/2013 6:00 AM, Guy Eschemann wrote:
Hello RCIngham,

sorry to hear that. FPGA Exchange is built on a platform that makes heavy use of JavaScript, so the minimum browser requirements are quite high:

- Internet Explorer 10+
- Google Chrome 24+
- Firefox 14+
- Safari 5+

As the aim is to create a discussion forum for the next decade of programmable logic, we unfortunately cannot support older browsers.
LOL, I didn't know anyone created programmable logic with a browser.
You might want to rethink your approach. There are a lot of people who
don't control the computers they work on. Do you really want to exclude
a significant portion of your potential audience?

BTW, I don't think you ever responded to the post that asked why you are
announcing this here which would have the effect of splitting the
community. This group is barely alive these days. Your site may kill
it off.

--

Rick
 
On 25/06/2013 17:07, Guy Eschemann wrote:
Hello Rick,

I'm not happy about the fact that some people can't access the forum because their IT department doesn't allow modern browsers. But I guess I have to live with this limitation for now. With time, even conservative IT departments will have to upgrade, if only for security reasons.

This is a honest attempt at creating a friendly, vendor-independent discussion space where FPGA developers can share their knowledge. A bit like comp.arch.fpga was 15 years ago. People are moving away from newsgroups anyway, so I'd rather have them join FPGA Exchange than some random LinkedIn group.

Guy.
Hi Guy,

I am not sure how long you have been using usenet but this forum has
been a vendor/company-independent friendly (especially compared to some
of the other forums I read) forum since I started to use it a few
decades ago.

I agree with Rick and Uwe that there is really no need for another FPGA
forum especially one which is controlled by a single person (right?).

I understand why Vendors are doing it as it increases traffic to their
website and gives them a better marketing tool but FPGA Exchange seems
to be somewhat decoupled from your noasic one, so I am not sure why you
decided to spend the time and effort to set it up.

Anyway, good luck with your FPGA consultancy firm,

Regards,
Hans
www.ht-lab.com



On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 5:19:30 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote:

LOL, I didn't know anyone created programmable logic with a browser.

You might want to rethink your approach. There are a lot of people who

don't control the computers they work on. Do you really want to exclude

a significant portion of your potential audience?



BTW, I don't think you ever responded to the post that asked why you are

announcing this here which would have the effect of splitting the

community. This group is barely alive these days. Your site may kill

it off.



--



Rick
 
On 6/25/2013 12:07 PM, Guy Eschemann wrote:
Hello Rick,

I'm not happy about the fact that some people can't access the forum because their IT department doesn't allow modern browsers. But I guess I have to live with this limitation for now. With time, even conservative IT departments will have to upgrade, if only for security reasons.
I take issue at your use of the term "modern". Chrome 24 was released
only 8 months ago, Internet Explorer 7 months ago, Firefox 14 a year ago.

But the site is yours to run as you see fit.


This is a honest attempt at creating a friendly, vendor-independent discussion space where FPGA developers can share their knowledge. A bit like comp.arch.fpga was 15 years ago. People are moving away from newsgroups anyway, so I'd rather have them join FPGA Exchange than some random LinkedIn group.
Again, you have an interesting way of characterizing the other
discussion forums. Not many here would agree with you and it is a bit
offputting for you to imply the other groups that we like to be somehow
unfit. I'm sure you prefer the folks use your site. I would too if I
had started a web site.

--

Rick
 
Hello Rick,

I'm not happy about the fact that some people can't access the forum because their IT department doesn't allow modern browsers. But I guess I have to live with this limitation for now. With time, even conservative IT departments will have to upgrade, if only for security reasons.

This is a honest attempt at creating a friendly, vendor-independent discussion space where FPGA developers can share their knowledge. A bit like comp.arch.fpga was 15 years ago. People are moving away from newsgroups anyway, so I'd rather have them join FPGA Exchange than some random LinkedIn group.

Guy.



On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 5:19:30 PM UTC+2, rickman wrote:
LOL, I didn't know anyone created programmable logic with a browser.

You might want to rethink your approach. There are a lot of people who

don't control the computers they work on. Do you really want to exclude

a significant portion of your potential audience?



BTW, I don't think you ever responded to the post that asked why you are

announcing this here which would have the effect of splitting the

community. This group is barely alive these days. Your site may kill

it off.



--



Rick
 
Rick,

Guy does not get advertising $ when people use comp.arch.fpga.

Andy
 
Rick,

Guy does not get advertising $ when people use comp.arch.fpga.

Andy
Quite so. I feel that 'FPGARelated.com' adds some value,
so I don't begrudge Stephane his advertising revenue.


---------------------------------------
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com
 
Guy Eschemann <Guy.Eschemann@gmail.com> writes:

This is a honest attempt at creating a friendly, vendor-independent
discussion space where FPGA developers can share their knowledge. A
bit like comp.arch.fpga was 15 years ago. People are moving away from
newsgroups anyway, so I'd rather have them join FPGA Exchange than
some random LinkedIn group.
Does your "modern" platform provide any control for the user to choose
what content he wants or doesn't want to see? Sort of like what we've
had on Usenet since the 1990s, sorting, threading, scoring...

As far as LinkedIn goes I don't think it's going to be a discussion
platform. In fact, I've been surprised at the lack of discussion on
LinkedIn in the various FPGA-related groups. Other than "please do my
homework" and "what book / what eval kit should I buy" from extreme
beginners and"please read my blog" and some job ads, it's been pretty
quiet. Although I have to admit I wouldn't have known about Arrow's
cheap Cyclone V SoC trainings this summer if it weren't for LinkedIn.
 
<snip>

As far as LinkedIn goes I don't think it's going to be a discussion
platform. In fact, I've been surprised at the lack of discussion on
LinkedIn in the various FPGA-related groups. Other than "please do my
homework" and "what book / what eval kit should I buy" from extreme
beginners and"please read my blog" and some job ads, it's been pretty
quiet. Although I have to admit I wouldn't have known about Arrow's
cheap Cyclone V SoC trainings this summer if it weren't for LinkedIn.
I agree with you, the signal-to-noise ratio in the FPGA- and VHDL-relate
groups that I belong to is rather poor. I quit one group because it was al
job-related and shameless self-promotion. I occasionally post to advis
people against doing something obviously really wrong, but I don't expec
to learn anything worthwhile in any of their groups.


---------------------------------------
Posted through http://www.FPGARelated.com
 
On 6/28/2013 3:55 AM, RCIngham wrote:
snip

As far as LinkedIn goes I don't think it's going to be a discussion
platform. In fact, I've been surprised at the lack of discussion on
LinkedIn in the various FPGA-related groups. Other than "please do my
homework" and "what book / what eval kit should I buy" from extreme
beginners and"please read my blog" and some job ads, it's been pretty
quiet. Although I have to admit I wouldn't have known about Arrow's
cheap Cyclone V SoC trainings this summer if it weren't for LinkedIn.


I agree with you, the signal-to-noise ratio in the FPGA- and VHDL-related
groups that I belong to is rather poor. I quit one group because it was all
job-related and shameless self-promotion. I occasionally post to advise
people against doing something obviously really wrong, but I don't expect
to learn anything worthwhile in any of their groups.
I am in a few groups at Linkedin and I find an interesting discussion
now and again. There was a rather long one on MISC and Forth, but that
discussion had a poor SNR (at least from my viewpoint). There is an
interesting one in one of the FPGA groups where someone is writing
training materials and seems to be doing something worthwhile. I
haven't figured out how he is presenting the materials though.

This group, comp.arch.fpga is not so bad, but a lot of usenet groups are
pretty poor SNR too. Not that they don't have much content, but they
can have *so much* noise. Actually it is more like SDR, signal to drama
ratio. lol

--

Rick
 
I would add that most groups, this one included, have a large body of: "I'm a GEN Y slacker. I need somebody to do my homework for me so that I can get back to Facebook". This sort of content drives those of us that are FPGA experts away. Forums need critical mass. This is the only FPGA-based discussion that comes close. Good luck to FPGA Exchange.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top