<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is bigger and better always better?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/2011/04/13/is-bigger-and-better-always-better/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/2011/04/13/is-bigger-and-better-always-better/</link>
	<description>Shedding Light on the Hidden World of Embedded Systems</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jul 2014 16:18:37 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Titus</title>
		<link>http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/2011/04/13/is-bigger-and-better-always-better/#comment-6214</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Titus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:29:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/?p=523#comment-6214</guid>
		<description>Years ago many embedded systems and early home computers used the Intel 8-bit 8080 microprocessor.  Then Zilog introduced the Z80, essentially an 8080 clone but easier to use because it reduced the number of support components such as a clock driver, extra power supply, etc.  Unfortunately, some software crashed, even though the Z80 had the same instruction set, registers, and so on.  It turned out that a flag in the Z80 behaved differently than the equivalent flag in an 8080.  As I recall, the offending software used the flag in an unusual way and the Zilog Z80 didn&#039;t duplicate that action.  Someone came up with a work-around, but it caused a lot of recompiling, which was a pain 35 years ago.  This 8080-Z80-compatibility problem remains with us.  Visit: http://fixunix.com/cp-m/252349-z80-8080-tester-program.html. --Jon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Years ago many embedded systems and early home computers used the Intel 8-bit 8080 microprocessor.  Then Zilog introduced the Z80, essentially an 8080 clone but easier to use because it reduced the number of support components such as a clock driver, extra power supply, etc.  Unfortunately, some software crashed, even though the Z80 had the same instruction set, registers, and so on.  It turned out that a flag in the Z80 behaved differently than the equivalent flag in an 8080.  As I recall, the offending software used the flag in an unusual way and the Zilog Z80 didn&#8217;t duplicate that action.  Someone came up with a work-around, but it caused a lot of recompiling, which was a pain 35 years ago.  This 8080-Z80-compatibility problem remains with us.  Visit: <a href="http://fixunix.com/cp-m/252349-z80-8080-tester-program.html" rel="nofollow">http://fixunix.com/cp-m/252349-z80-8080-tester-program.html</a>. &#8211;Jon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: C.R. @ LI</title>
		<link>http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/2011/04/13/is-bigger-and-better-always-better/#comment-6205</link>
		<dc:creator>C.R. @ LI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 01:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.embeddedinsights.com/channels/?p=523#comment-6205</guid>
		<description>But it did make for a cool video to see that little(r) plane do a 90 degree spin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2StZVDUck9M 
&quot;Some of you belongs may have shifted during the flight&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But it did make for a cool video to see that little(r) plane do a 90 degree spin:<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2StZVDUck9M" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2StZVDUck9M</a><br />
&#8220;Some of you belongs may have shifted during the flight&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
