Page 1 of 8 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 77

Thread: FB4

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,675

    Default FB4

    Just wondering if anyone had any information on this and what the difference is between the FB3 and FB4.

    Bill mentioned it in the 506 Scanner Thread when it came to allocating production resources, however I didn't want to take that off topic by asking there.

    I've been hearing rumours for a while of its existence but no information.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bromley, Kent, UK
    Posts
    201

    Default

    ....and the elusive FB3.net?

    Pangolin are such a tease.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    The FB4 is what we called the FB3.net
    http://www.facebook.com/SubsonicSystems
    http://www.frikkinlazors.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    I just hope it will use a native network interface and not a sort of "USB extender" box which isn't compatible with tcp/ip protocol (switches, router...), and furthermore uses all 4 wire pairs in the ethernet cable, removing the possibility to use unused pairs for emergency switch or other remote controls...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Bromley, Kent, UK
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norty303 View Post
    The FB4 is what we called the FB3.net
    Pangolin must have changed their minds again then.

    Quote Originally Posted by dave View Post
    From some brief conversations I have had with Bill, there will be 2 solutions at some stage.

    The FB3.net, which will be known as the Gemini - a single board computer to carry out processing for FB3's which are plugged in to slots in it,

    or

    The FB4, which will be a OEM board similar to a FB3SE, but with network

    Exciting times ahead!
    This was December 2012, in a thread started in September 2011!

    It would be a shame to not get something like the QM2000.net that would take existing FB3s and allow them to run over networks.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    Pangolin must have changed their minds again then.
    Ah yes, my bad, although the sentiment regarding naming is the same.

    FB3.NET was a name 'we' created to describe the Gemini/Apollo product which acts as a dock for FB3's, to allow network control.

    FB4 is the DAC with integrated network.


    Pangolin actualy recommend a solution that will take 4 FB3's and run up to 100m over cat5, which was detailed in thei earlier thread - the Startech unit, although this is not true ethernet solution, it uses its on proprietary protocol, and is probably what sbk is referring to above (and thanks for claifying it uses all 4 pairs - I'd been trying to find that out for a while!)
    http://www.facebook.com/SubsonicSystems
    http://www.frikkinlazors.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norty303 View Post
    The FB4 is what we called the FB3.net
    I kind of suspected that although with the lack of information I was a little surprised to hear they were on the cusp of launch.

    Will be interesting to see the solution when released and how it compares to the other .net products they produce.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    East Sussex, England
    Posts
    5,127

    Default

    See my post above Al where I corrected myself.

    Gemini/Apollo (what we were calling FB3.NET) was the network dock device for the FB3.

    I suspect that it may have given way to the FB4 in terms of demand and development.
    http://www.facebook.com/SubsonicSystems
    http://www.frikkinlazors.co.uk

    You are using Bonetti's defense against me, ah?

    I thought it fitting, considering the rocky terrain.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    1,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norty303 View Post
    Pangolin actualy recommend a solution that will take 4 FB3's and run up to 100m over cat5, which was detailed in thei earlier thread - the Startech unit, although this is not true ethernet solution, it uses its on proprietary protocol, and is probably what sbk is referring to above (and thanks for claifying it uses all 4 pairs - I'd been trying to find that out for a while!)
    Yes it uses the 4 pairs, I looked carefully for that as I use the 2 "unused" pairs for emergency stop/main AC power on my control center along the network line on a single ethernet wire.

    As I'm too lazy to run two parallel cables on the field, it would be cool to stay with the standard 100 Mb network protocol for the future FB4

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,729

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norty303 View Post
    See my post above Al where I corrected myself.

    Gemini/Apollo (what we were calling FB3.NET) was the network dock device for the FB3.

    I suspect that it may have given way to the FB4 in terms of demand and development.
    A solution that allows the many fb3s out in the wild to be upgraded would be awesome.
    This space for rent.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •