Hi:
controlCARDs are TI C2000 digital signal controller development and deployment boards with edge contacts fitting DIMM 100-pin sockets. They also make various application development backplanes mating with the controlCARDs.
These cards are almost perfect for my application, except for one show stopper--they don't break out the CPU external memory bus (XINTF), so they are useless if you need more RAM than what's on the chip or to run the bus to another device.
When they released the 300MHz "Delfino" DSC, lacking non-volatile memory and thus most applications of this chip need to use the XINTF, they then released a new controlCARD with DIMM168 form factor. DIMM168 was used for SDR SDRAM.
DIMM168 sockets are essentially obsolete in the straight-up configuration, though 25 degree angled versions are still in production. There are over 10000 of the kind I want to use available in various 2nd tier (obsolete part) vendors, and I have a tray of 80. I only need to make about 16 backplanes, with 2-3 sockets each.
TI says that they plan to select another high pin-count socket for future controlCARDs. They also say they will continue to support the DIMM168 Delfino. Whatever this means I'm not sure, other than producing the controlCARD itself. Since they don't plan to develop any other DIMM168 cards, they also aren't making any compatible backplanes.
I could ignore TI and complete my project using the obsolete socket. The only thing that bugs me is that I will be developing basically a new controlCARD based on the F2812 processor, using the DIMM168 form factor, as well as a FPGA card that will also fit this socket, so that any application requiring a mid-range FPGA coupled to this or a Delfino CPU can be built quite easily from these modular components by simply designing a backplane to handle IO.
Ie., I would like to "open-source" the HW design eventually. However, in order for it to be maximally useful, it must be based on a socket that folks can actually buy.
I am getting to the point where I just have to move forward. I have the CAD library almost done for the DIMM168, so choosing another socket would be undesireable because 1. It wouldn't be what TI chooses; 2. I'd probably have to develop CAD libraries for it; 3. It wouldn't even be compatible with the Delfino which hopefully TI will actually continue to support like they said.
TI's selection process for the next socket for their controlCARDs is taking longer than even my work flow. This is amazing because, I ork for the government ;-) They were working on this decision in the summer, and still no decision.
What would you do in this situation?