Hello! firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > I disagree ;-) I believe this is a very valid approach! I definitely believe that this may be much more elegant than having your PCB routed wildly or requiring either unnecessary big routing area or more than two layers. I'm afraid it's still routed wildly, but at least it's manageable ;-) Remember also my "stackable" aproach - the hardware is divided into two parts, upper and lower. Upper PCB contains the important (and expensive) chips, whereas the lower PCB is varied according to the target board (0.8", 1.0", SX-64, narrow) and contains only glue TTL chips. This way only the small lower board needs to be changed for the target system. Regards, Michau. Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2013-07-20 15:01:24
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.