Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Philip Hands  wrote:
> Alain Williams  writes:
>
>> I wonder where they got the idea from:
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38515472
>>
>> http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html
>
> That's _very_ light on details, and I note that they're careful not to
> show the business end of the socket -- so is that the old tactic of an
> incumbent announcing vapourware in order to try and kill interest in a
> disruptive product that they would prefer not to have on the market?

 it'll be very interesting to see if they actually "Get It".  the
ice-computer team - even with $100m investment - utterly failed.  the
team behind olpc australia, with a $AUD 10m grant from the aus govt,
failed to get it.  google, with project ara, failed to get it.

 so... yeah...

l.

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Alain Williams 
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 07:17:32PM +0100, Phil Hands wrote:
> Alain Williams  writes:
> 
> > I wonder where they got the idea from:
> >
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38515472
> >
> > http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html
> 
> That's _very_ light on details, and I note that they're careful not to
> show the business end of the socket -- so is that the old tactic of an
> incumbent announcing vapourware in order to try and kill interest in a
> disruptive product that they would prefer not to have on the market?

About 30 seconds in on the BBC video you get a quick view of the hole.

-- 
Alain Williams
Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT 
Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256  http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: 
http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php
#include 

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Julie Marchant  wrote:
> That could be a problem. If it's successful, people will associate the 
> concept with Intel and assume that eoma is a cheap ripoff. Also, with Intel 
> controlling it, you can bet x86 will dominate it.

 ... yyup.

> Our response should be to publicly urge Intel to use an eoma standard, to 
> ensure architecture agnosticism and that there isn't a conflict of interest.

 if they've actually reused the PCMCIA connectors then that's an
incompatibility issue which would be a Certification Mark infringment
[risk of bringing EOMA68 into disrepute through electrical or
electronic incompatibility].

 l.

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

[Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Alain Williams 
I wonder where they got the idea from:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38515472

http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html

-- 
Alain Williams
Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT 
Lecturer.
+44 (0) 787 668 0256  http://www.phcomp.co.uk/
Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: 
http://www.phcomp.co.uk/contact.php
#include 

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Jonathan Frederickson 
On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
 wrote:
>  which are, in your opinion, the "right set of interfaces"?  serious
> question.  if you're going to make such comments, you'd better be
> prepared to back them up and be prepared to justify them with a
> *REALLY* thorough analysis.

I think all he meant was that Intel can pick whatever interfaces they
want for the standard that they think will be relatively future-proof.
They don't have to worry about finding SoCs with those interfaces,
because they manufacture the SoCs - they just have to decide on them
at the start.

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Philip Hands 
Alain Williams  writes:

> I wonder where they got the idea from:
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38515472
>
> http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html

That's _very_ light on details, and I note that they're careful not to
show the business end of the socket -- so is that the old tactic of an
incumbent announcing vapourware in order to try and kill interest in a
disruptive product that they would prefer not to have on the market?

Cheers, Phil.
-- 
|)|  Philip Hands  [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]  HANDS.COM Ltd.
|-|  http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/
|(|  Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34,   21075 Hamburg,GERMANY


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread peter green 

On 05/01/17 18:50, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:

Why would they want to cripple their product by restricting themselves to
the set of interfaces Luke has chosen.

  ?? peter!!


Intel operates under a totally different set of constraints from Luke. If
Luke wants to make a successor to his compute cards he needs to find a new
SoC that has the right set of interfaces. If Intel wants to make a successor
to their compute cards they can ensure that one of their upcoming SoCs has
the right set of interfaces.

  which are, in your opinion, the "right set of interfaces"?  serious
question.  if you're going to make such comments, you'd better be
prepared to back them up and be prepared to justify them with a
*REALLY* thorough analysis.

If you look through the history of this list you will find the evolution of 
EOMA68 is a battle to find a compromise between

1. Interfaces that are useful.
2. Interfaces that are ubiquitous on SoCs today
3. Interfaces that are likely to be ubiquitous on SoCs tomorrow.
4. Interfaces that fit within the pins of a pre-existing economical connector.

Intel doesn't have to worry nearly as much about 2 through 4 as you do. They 
have no reason to make it easy for competitors to make compatible products. 
They can ensure that their own future SoCs retain the Interfaces previous ones 
had. They think and work on a scale where custom connectors are an economical 
option.

Of course this also means they have a much higher threshold of success. A 
product line with hundreds of thousands of sales would be a big success for 
someone like you but would likely be considered a flop for them.

If I was in their place I would be including PCIe, SATA and Ethernet (likely in 
some kind of MII form so the card isn't burdened with the cost of a 
transceiver).



___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:40 PM, peter green  wrote:
> On 05/01/17 18:50, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>>
>>> Why would they want to cripple their product by restricting themselves to
>>> the set of interfaces Luke has chosen.
>>
>>   ?? peter!!
>>
>>> Intel operates under a totally different set of constraints from Luke. If
>>> Luke wants to make a successor to his compute cards he needs to find a
>>> new
>>> SoC that has the right set of interfaces. If Intel wants to make a
>>> successor
>>> to their compute cards they can ensure that one of their upcoming SoCs
>>> has
>>> the right set of interfaces.
>>
>>   which are, in your opinion, the "right set of interfaces"?  serious
>> question.  if you're going to make such comments, you'd better be
>> prepared to back them up and be prepared to justify them with a
>> *REALLY* thorough analysis.
>
> If you look through the history of this list you will find the evolution of
> EOMA68 is a battle to find a compromise between
>
> 1. Interfaces that are useful.
> 2. Interfaces that are ubiquitous on SoCs today
> 3. Interfaces that are likely to be ubiquitous on SoCs tomorrow.
> 4. Interfaces that fit within the pins of a pre-existing economical
> connector.

 sounds like a reasonable set of requirements.  keep going.  you've
started so you're going to have to go through with a full evaluation.

> If I was in their place I would be including PCIe, SATA and Ethernet (likely
> in some kind of MII form so the card isn't burdened with the cost of a
> transceiver).

 ok so those are the set you're going with?  what about video, sound,
GPIO, low-speed peripherals and sensors?

 i'm not letting you off the hook here after you said that EOMA68's
interfaces are "crippled", peter.

l.

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 
---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Jonathan Frederickson
 wrote:

> It's a shame that none of the previous EOMA-68 devices got off the
> ground before Intel pulled this out -

 that's what i thought, initially... but then i realised that it's
better with a long-term standard to get it right than to release
before the standard's ready.

standards have *ONE SHOT* at getting it right.  make even one single
mistake and that's it, nobody will trust the standard - EVER (they
also won't trust you, either).

 look up my analysis of the 96boards consumer standard, and the CEO's
response, for an example.

l.

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

[Arm-netbook] Mini-PCIe and other interfaces (was Re: Intel at CES)

2017-01-05 Thread Paul Boddie 
On Thursday 5. January 2017 22.30.42 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> ---
> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
> 
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Alain Williams  wrote:
> > About 30 seconds in on the BBC video you get a quick view of the hole.
> 
>  ah!  that looks very much like Mini PCIe.  which has USB and a
> one-lane PCIe on it, a few GPIOs and I2C.  50 pin.  if that's what
> they've picked it's not a bad choice.

Mini-PCIe rang a bell, and then I suddenly remembered the following unrelated 
product from before the Christmas vacation:

http://globalscaletechnologies.com/p-72-marvell-espressobin.aspx

I actually found it via here, originally:

https://wiki.debian.org/InstallingDebianOn/Marvell/ESPRESSOBin

Which may mean that some of the Debian-on-ARM people are familiar with it. The 
Mini-PCIe connection is that this board actually supports that interface along 
with SATA and multiple network ports, which is pretty unusual for a low-cost 
single board computer.

What might be more interesting in the context of EOMA68 or related standards 
is the SoC, the Armada 3700:

https://github.com/MarvellEmbeddedProcessors/main/wiki/Armada-3700

Despite very odd usage of the word "proprietary" on that page, it appears that 
the documentation and software is pretty transparent, although I haven't dug 
into any of this myself.

Sorry if this is tangential or got mentioned before!

Paul

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread Boris Barbour 

I don't think the Intel announcement is bad news. Firstly it
validates/builds recognition of the general idea, which may be helpful
in some quarters. Second, there are plenty of people that will want the
cheap, low power version, which means ARM. Intel can't do that. And they
hate really pushing cheap stuff, in case it undercuts the expensive stuff.

As you were...

___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk

Re: [Arm-netbook] Intel at CES

2017-01-05 Thread raphael . melotte 

On January 5, 2017 6:38:10 PM GMT+01:00, Alain Williams  
wrote:
>I wonder where they got the idea from:
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38515472
>
>http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/compute-card/intel-compute-card.html

It's astonishing... there are so many similarities it can't be a coincidence.
They just saw a new market and feeled they should be in.

Intel is able to promote their products on a different scale but I do think 
eoma68 can make it's way to the general public anyway. Having a good community 
making it easy to use for the lambda user can make a difference (just like 
there are Windows users switching to GNU/Linux everyday because they met a 
friendly and open community online).
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-netb...@files.phcomp.co.uk