f57f53c5   
   XPost: sci.electronics.design, sci.electronics.misc   
   From: presence@MUNGEpanix.com   
      
   In sci.electronics.misc langwadt@fonz.dk  wrote:   
   > On Mar 7, 1:51?am, "Tim Williams"  wrote:   
   >> Hmmm, not a big deal I suspect.   
   >>   
   >> Build a general purpose RF block for, say, 2.45GHz BT or 802.11(etc), or   
   >> whatever. ?Give it handles to talk with anything (modulations, bit   
   >> streams, etc.), design and build it on a particular fab process, and like   
   >> magic, anything incorporating that block will also work. ?Monolithic   
   >> inductors can be fabricated with not very good Q at 2.45GHz (I think they   
   >> usually peak around Q = 10 or 20 around 5GHz), but enough to do "silicon   
   >> oscillators" and stuff. ?Voltage regulation (bandgap, or old school buried   
   >> zener) and temperature compensation are no-brainers, as ICs go. ?Want a   
   >> DDS? ?Just chuck some more IP at it! ?Then whatever ancillary function   
   >> (moisture, temperature sensor, etc.) simply plugs into this mess of   
   >> transistors and functions.   
   >   
   > I remember working on making bluetooth in a "single chip"   
   > we had a working radio and build an evolution of an existing SOC to   
   > stack   
   > on top of it in a single package   
   >   
   > Everything worked great when we tested the first samples, but then   
   > the   
   > software guys started running their code in ROM then the sensitivity   
   > dropped   
   >   
   > turned out that the ROM being in a different corner of the SOC coupled   
   > noise   
   > into the radio VCO inductors, but the RAM where the test code was run   
   > didn't   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Quite crazy, as all that circuitry is squeezing into a few milimeters of   
   >> silicon, when a few decades ago it was, well of course it was migrating to   
   >> thick film before monolithic, but before that, it was all machined   
   >> cavities, hand-soldered RF transistors, and microstrip everywhere. ?I   
   >> suppose Bluetooth would've taken up a whole rack, back in the 70s, and   
   >> that's assuming the computing power to provide whatever spread spectrum,   
   >> encoding, error detection, etc. functionality is required.   
   >>   
   >> Tim   
   >>   
   >   
   > I worked on one of the very first bluetooth implementations, it was;   
   > a DSP, a flash, an FPGA, an RF chip, a saw filter, a whole bunch of   
   > passives   
   > it was probably 5*5cm PCB fully packed on both sides   
      
   In the 1988 to 1990s ish time, there was a story in popular mechanics or   
   popular science about a digital ghost canceler for television signals that   
   bounced off buildings. It was huge PCB made using an array of DSPs and   
   have to have pounds of gold plated ceramic chips on it. It was a pretty   
   looking board, that must have screamed at like 16MHz or something like   
   that.   
      
   What would that take these days, to basically subtract patterns from a   
   NTSC signal? A couple chips?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)