You are not getting it. Flashing firmware deletes the existing FW from camera flash memory and replaces it with a whole new image contained in the FW update file.
Nikon cameras now have as many as four different "firmware" modules that can updated independently. Sorry, but I'll stick with my contention.
All new P&S cams from Nikon also have "Expeed" CPUs as well. Do you really think that a slow P&S uses the same processor as a D3 or D3x?
Never said it did. And do you think a Canon G10 has the same DIGIC as a 1DIV? What these imaging ASICs provide is an API. I'd guess that the API is pretty much the same across the products.
If they did, we should be able to expect DSLR like write times clearing the buffer to storage, multitasking for continuous shooting etc.
If the ASIC were the only thing dealing with those things, sure. But unfortunately, it's not.
No Nikon P&S that i know of has particularly strong credentials in that area.
Nope. But that's not because of the imaging ASIC.
An example i can think of is D3 to D3s and D300 to D300s. Now, for better or worse, can process video that the previous versions couldn't.
Nikon's video so far is Motion-JPEG. That means that the imaging ASIC is still outputting JPEGs, but now something is stringing them together into a movie file. But I think the simple explanation is that the D300s EXPEED chip (yes, still one chip labeled EXPEED) is a newer variant. It's not unusual to take your old ASIC and add things to it for the next generation of products. Given that what I'm seeing on a D300s is
exactly the same output as from a D300 under the same test condition, I'd guess that all the still shooting aspects are exactly the same in the two generations of chip.
If the guts were the same, they could indeed provide video functionality with a FW update but they have not done that, cause i think, the older models are missing new hardware that assists with video encoding.
Actually, you're missing a key aspect of using an ASIC. I'm fairly certain that Nikon could create firmware that strings JPEGs together into a Motion-JPEG. You may remember the D100 (I do ;~). It used the camera's CPU to do compression of NEFs. That's why NEF buffer clearing was so slow when you set compression: the camera's CPU was being taxed. In the D70, Nikon moved the software compression routine
into the ASIC, where it became optimized hardware. Poof. Fast compression. Same thing would be true with stitching Motion-JPEG: slow if done in firmware, fast in the ASIC. So if you're iterating the ASIC, you put it in there. People wonder why it might take two years to add video to a D300: well one answer is that developing, changing, and testing the ASIC isn't exactly a "you'll have it next week" process.
Using a catch all term like Expeed also means that they can update their hardware and use best of breed for new models while still benefiting from the previous investment on marketing setting up the Expeed brand.
Right, so Canon is wrong. They specifically point to their ASIC as DIGIC. Across all models. It's unclear to me why Nikon would want to widen the claim as to what EXPEED is and then provide no substance for that.
The only manufacturer that is doing processor version numbering so far is canon and they are talking about a particular chip, not a processing concept.
What the heck is a "processing concept"?
No-one, not even Nikon, would put marketing spin on something to muddy the waters if there is a simple direct answer like "we use a CPU that is called Expeed".
Ah, you don't know Nikon like I know Nikon ;~). They're very good at fuzzy claims in marketing. Unfortunately, fuzzy claims aren't good marketing.
That is true and it makes my point exactly. Mac NX2 does not need Microsoft .Net as the framework to run as the Windows version does. The Mac version has a completely different codebase to run on OSX. The calculations and algorithms the application uses are defined by Nikon, That in simple terms, sit on top of a code foundation that talks to the operating system. That code foundation is unique to each OS version
You're mixing application foundations with library code. Yes, the Mac and Windows versions use different application foundations, sourced from a third party. What I'm referring to is a very specific walled off library that does the raw conversion. If you write an application on either platform in
any application foundation, you can do the same thing Capture NX2 does by licensing the SDK. That provides you with that special module that is callable by your application. That module is the core that is also coded in hardware in the EXPEED chip in the camera. That module does not "talk to the operating system." It talks to your application.
--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com 
