Fundamental Qi question
openmoko at ginguppin.de
Thu Jun 4 10:39:49 CEST 2009
> more complicated and lure people into using NAND whereas SD is the
> In the GTA03 design, we would not have used NAND for anything but
> storing Qi and read-only factory data. Likewise, for gta02-core, I
> wouldn't consider using u-boot.
my experience is, that nand is far more reliable and robust than sd (which
had recurring issues of data loss).
thus i have the crucial data in nand (ie minimal necessary system -- /bin,
additionally i lived under the impression that nand was faster.
of course, both date from a few months ago, when i decided to to not run
my entire system from sd any longer.
with my holidays ahaed and thus some time to play around:
- what reasons make you say, sd is the future?
- what reasons, except the impossibility to replace the nand when it is
worn out by to many write operations, led to the decision to use nand
More information about the community