| Electronics > Projects, Designs, and Technical Stuff |
| How do yo limit feature creep? |
| << < (3/6) > >> |
| SiliconWizard:
--- Quote from: technix on January 24, 2020, 06:24:46 pm ---In your opinion, is it cheaper to do the center channel mixdown and subwoofer filter and mixdown using audio DSP or is it cheaper using audio grade op amps? --- End quote --- Well, ok, the use of a DSP for this may seem overkill, but it's probably going to actually lower part count significantly, and make your design more flexible. Whatever is cheaper will depend on many factors including quantity, and whether you count development time or not (I guess the DSP approach will initially take up more of your time for the software part!) Given the unit price of the ADAU1701, the all-analog version would likely cost you a lot more if you use quality op amps (and again, bigger BOM, probably more PCB area...) But the dev time for the DSP needs to be taken into account as well, and unless it has changed? the tools for those AD DSPs were not free... |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: technix on January 24, 2020, 02:55:08 pm ---How do you limit yourself from such feature creeps? --- End quote --- Set a time limit! |
| fourtytwo42:
Realize that technology will overtake you! As an individual developer there is a limited amount you can achieve in a year or two for example and in that time the starting choices you made have become obsolete and so your creation is no longer bleeding edge. So in other words after a few years enjoyment it's time to start again ^-^ |
| technix:
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on January 24, 2020, 06:56:31 pm ---But the dev time for the DSP needs to be taken into account as well, and unless it has changed? the tools for those AD DSPs were not free... --- End quote --- Those SigmaDSP's use SigmaStudio as the development software, which is free for at least basic versions. As of debug pod, USBi hardware is open and I have found a copy of its firmware somewhere online (and cloned all of those as my SigmaLink USBi debug pod.) |
| DaJMasta:
Split it into a new project or consider the first one done and this one with the extra features to be the sequel. The problem with feature creep is that you get too much going on at once and there are too many places where things can go wrong for it to be practical to troubleshoot or deal with, so if you're doing a more iterative design and adding features, it's not really an issue. In your example specifically: if each version was its own board that was assembled and tested, I'd say it's no feature creep at all and is instead a design building off earlier ones. If all three versions made it to the schematic/layout stage but weren't actually built and tested, yeah, that would be pretty massive feature creep. Just gotta define what you want to do and actually do it. If that proves less than you want overall, nothing wrong with adding more or making it more complex- so long as the first version is done. The risk with feature creep is that you add so many things at once that you can no longer really manageably make the thing work. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |