Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
The University of Texas at Austin has a very good computer engineering and they also have 4 embedded/dsp lab courses. I am partial, I got my masters and doctorate there and enjoyed it and thought the courses were very good.
oh yea... I have checked the MSc offered by the universities, and I realized there are only a few university offer MSc major in embedded system.
Texas-Austin is one of them, some british unvirsities like Eidnhoven, Huddersfield,Heriot-Watt etc, and NTU in Singapore.
These names seemed strange to me...so.. I'm not sure if they are good
If you're looking for a really great all round program the University of
California at Berkeley (www.berkeley.edu) has one of the top engineering programs in the U.S. They offer a degree called Electrical Engineering and Computer Science that covers both topics. The curiculum tends to emphasize theory rather than implementation but if you pick your courses carefully you will get some good hands on labs. All of the University of California campuses have good engineering programs.
If you're looking for a really great all round program the University of
California at Berkeley (www.berkeley.edu) has one of the top engineering
.....
Brent
University California-Berkeley is undoubtedly one of the top uversity in engineering. I have browsed through the master program offered in berkeley, their taught course looks like research one. That is rather too scientific, i am looking for course that is more toward engineering practices.
UT Austin would NOT be a good choice then. Most of the classes (particularly graduate level) are theory though they almost always have a project component. They are usually simulates this, or design this, etc. I had one where you had to find the transfer function of an RC filter. Sounded easy at the time, but they included all of the parasitic resistances and capacitances which made the problem time consuming. The idea was how to model systems actual behavior vs. the typical design behavior.
UT Austin would NOT be a good choice then. Most of the classes (particularly graduate level) are theory though they almost always have a project component. They are usually simulates this, or design this, etc. I had one where you had to find the transfer function of an RC filter. Sounded easy at the time, but they included all of the parasitic resistances and capacitances which made the problem time consuming. The idea was how to model systems actual behavior vs. the typical design behavior.
That sounds like VLSI design . It seems like these universities are emphasizing on building everthing from scratch. While I more interested in the embedded system design consideration, architecture, programming
I wouldn't say the emphasize building everyting from scratch. By learning how to design things from scratch you get a better understanding about how to use them correctly. In on of my classes we designed an Opamp from scratch - I have a much greater understanding about how they work after trying to design one. (Our opamp ended up having several watts of quiecent power - gives you a whole new respect for those uA amps that you can buy)
I wouldn't say the emphasize building everyting from scratch. By learning how to design things from scratch you get a better understanding about how to use them correctly. In on of my classes we designed an Opamp from scratch - I have a much greater understanding about how they work after trying to design one. (Our opamp ended up having several watts of quiecent power - gives you a whole new respect for those uA amps that you can buy)
oOoOoo. What are you major in?? I designed an op amp (simulation only) in my first degree's Electronics. Well.. I thought that is categorized under IC Design?
I was "Electrical Engineering and Computer Science". You can take all sorts of classes: Computer science, Signal processing, control, Electromagnetism, Digital design, Semiconductor fabrication etc. My experience was with undergraduate work but the graduate couses are similar.
For the sake of completeness, my degrees are in Electrical. But you could take optics, electromagnetics, power electronics, semiconductor manufacturing (doping, etc), vlsi, software design, and anything in the computer science program. Since I was there so long, I took just about everything that was available with a few exceptions. One of the benefits of large schools is that they have lots of research groups and therefore lots of diversity in the types of courses they teach.
Unfortunately, my school didnt offer me much oppurtunity. I'm in Electrical, just exposed little to computer. Therefore now i am seeking MSc in Computer system. hm.. however, I found some quite interesting books on embedded system.. so.. I guess self learning is possible too, with longer time required.
I know UMIST in Manchester UK offer an embedded systems MSc. They've got an excellent international profile, so may be good for you? If you are thinking about the UK, it's also worth checking out University of Bristol and Imperial College London. All are red brick (equivalent of Ivy League in the states) institutions with a reputation for electrical and electronic engineering.
If you want to do something with AI, or more oreintated on control, then Reading University has a lot of courses geared around Cybernetics. As does Bristol (as mentioned above) but reading has been doing this for longer, and is also another red brick. Oh its in the UK too. (Pronounced red-ing not read-ing).
Reading is supposed to be superb in this field. They have Kevin Warwick (the cyborg chap) as a Professor. A quick google search on his name will show you some of his work. I had brief contact with one of his Post Grad students who was loving the course there.
yeh i am loving the Cybernetics bits of my course, but the Computer Science bits are, well, without whishing to be rude to the lecturer, she likes delphi, she shouldn't be allowed near a computer on principle.
yeh i am loving the Cybernetics bits of my course, but the Computer Science bits are, well, without whishing to be rude to the lecturer, she likes delphi, she shouldn't be allowed near a computer on principle.
Delphi is pure borland crap.
Its bug ridden, this makes it un-stable, the language is a peice of inconsistant noncesene.
Have you ever dis-assembled delphi code, there is code like MOV EAX,EAX every now and again?
I mean, its just so badly made, those effective NOP's aren't for timing, they are for bloating and pissing you off.
Did i mention i hate this langauge, and anyone who promotes its use yet?
Oh moving onto the output file size, jinkies, whats with that no differnce between build and release mode? Constants have their names stored as strings in a table !?!?!?!
Also even constants your not using (i think this was fixed in D5).
I like Delphi, as do huge numbers of people, it's easy to use and compiles far faster than C or C++. I think if you disassemble any compiled program you're going to find loads of bits you consider shouldn't be there - if you don't like that, use assembler instead.
It's also fairly common to use Delphi for the interface, and then C or C++ for the actual program amongst C programmers.
If you've got a personal dislike of Delphi, that's your problem :lol:
I admit its purely personal, but so many people that have taken the time to learn C++ (MFC) or even java, have this.
Take just the other month, i was having to use delphi (i feal so dirty) again. Simple plan, multimedia timer, calling it every 10ms, simple ?
No, after properly defining the function, (ie saying to use stdcall) i founddelphi wasn't balancing the stack properly on return of this function. Now after no poking around with windbg, i was able to determine, it wasn't balancing it by 4bytes. WTF!
How can something not balence by 4bytes, thats not some small acidental error on my part in the way i defined the funciton, thats pure borland logic error.
In short i had to write my own few lines of inline asm to make the damn thing balance the stack.
As for looking at other high-level languages from a cracking perspective, C/C++ (not the borland one of course) dosen't ever put NOPs in (least not that i've seen, and i've cracked my share), GCC and MSVC often add a few lines of "padding" between functions as NOPs but these NEVER get executed, they are just there as overhead from linking.
In short, delphi has a fancy IDE yes, but its just too un-stable for me (and most C/MASM coders). You spend so much time fighting with the compiler, and MFC is faster now, not to mention .NET, in short its day is done, its bug ridden, horrible and time consuming, there are lots of better options out there.
Again, this is all my opion and hatred caused by delphi.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
. It seems like these universities are emphasizing on building everthing from scratch. While I more interested in the embedded system design consideration, architecture, programming