Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx

---

• From: "KJ" <kkjennings@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:27:15 -0400

---

"Antti" <Antti.Lukats@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1191054094.139576.244950@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On 29 Sep., 09:29, hal-use...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Hal
Murray) wrote:

<snip>

well, is that the same reason why Actel _INCLUDED_ oscillator in the
Fusion :) ?

Antti

Isn't the marketplace wonderful? If Actel does what you need then use their
parts.

KJ


.

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: Antti

• References:
  • 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: Antti
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: austin
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: John Adair
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: Antti
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: Hal Murray
  • Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
    • From: Antti

• Prev by Date: Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
• Next by Date: Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
• Previous by thread: Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
• Next by thread: Re: 2 leg crystal on FPGA: Lattice vs Xilinx
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

• Security
• UNIX
• Linux
• Coding
• Usenet

• Archive
• About
• Privacy
• Search
• Imprint

newsgroups.derkeiler.com  > Archive  > Comp  > comp.arch.fpga  > 2007-09