Excerpts from Chris Ball's message of Wed Nov 10 22:01:28 +0100 2010:
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip from Marvell -- the Armada 610/MMP2.
Congratulations on the successful
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Carlos Nazareno object...@gmail.com wrote:
Another thing I find sad is people raving on the different screen
technologies like with Kindle its incredible sunlight readability
when Pixel Qi much, much superior.
Horses for courses.
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
Naz -
Thanks for the thoughts!
IMHO it's better to delay the release of the 1.75 and force putting in
a touchscreen.
It's not a matter of time, it's a matter of the price deployments are willing
to pay for it. The
IMHO it's better to delay the release of the 1.75 and
force putting in a touchscreen.
It's not a matter of time, it's a matter of the price deployments are
willing to pay for it. The feedback we've heard so far is that since the
XO-1.75 without a touchscreen is every bit as functional as
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Hal Murray wrote:
IMHO it's better to delay the release of the 1.75 and
force putting in a touchscreen.
It's not a matter of time, it's a matter of the price deployments are
willing to pay for it. The feedback we've heard so far is that since the
XO-1.75 without a
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip from Marvell -- the Armada 610/MMP2.
Now that is good news.
Two
Two questions:
1.
Here (under Tech Specs)
http://bit.ly/bdr0Cz
it specs the 10 tablet with an ARMADA 168. Why did not you go with that
processor? Would not that be cheaper?
That's a Marvell product platform page, not OLPC's.
2.
What happened to the bigger display and the touch
On 11.11.2010, at 12:49, Ed McNierney wrote:
[...] we're talking about XO-1.75 right now, which is a laptop. An OLPC-3
tablet is a long way away and it's not really useful to discuss/speculate on
it now. We're working on XO-1.75.
- Ed
Back in July there were plans to have a
Okay, I will rephrase my questions maybe I will get a real answer to them:
1.
Is there any reason why do you use the latest and greatest Marvell SoC
instead of an old (and maybe cheaper) one? Like the tablets on the
Marvell product platform page do?
2.
There were plans for touch screen and
Bert -
No, not at all. Our plans were, and are, to build XO-1.75 laptops with
touchscreen support. That's an essential step in our tablet development, we
think. That will essentially provide us with a 7.5 4:3 tablet inside a laptop
case. That's a little small for a tablet, but it allows
Awesome :)
If we can make Sugar and its activities work on that smallish touchscreen we'd
be in an excellent position for the tablet work.
/me wants one
- Bert -
On 11.11.2010, at 19:30, Ed McNierney wrote:
Bert -
No, not at all. Our plans were, and are, to build XO-1.75 laptops with
Marvell's Armada SoC family is complicated. There are multiple product lines,
and multiple products in each product line, with new ones coming along all the
time. So it's hard to nail down just which device is the latest and greatest
at any time.
OLPC is (unsurprisingly) doing something a
Ed,
On 11 Nov 2010, at 18:30, Ed McNierney e...@laptop.org wrote:
Bert -
No, not at all. Our plans were, and are, to build XO-1.75 laptops with
touchscreen support. That's an essential step in our tablet development, we
think. That will essentially provide us with a 7.5 4:3 tablet
You can get Marvell's spec sheets on ... the Armada 610 SoCs at:
http://www.marvell.com/products/processors/applications/armada_600/armada610_pb.pdf
That spec sheet is kinda skimpy. In a discussion of CPU performance for
the XO-1.75, Chris Ball said we're now using a dual-issue CPU.
I was not
On 11.11.2010, at 21:33, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
You can get Marvell's spec sheets on ... the Armada 610 SoCs at:
http://www.marvell.com/products/processors/applications/armada_600/armada610_pb.pdf
That spec sheet is kinda skimpy. In a discussion of CPU performance for
the XO-1.75, Chris
Yes, the touchscreen is very important and is a complete gamechanger.
The natural reaction for everyone is to try to use the screen as a
touchscreen, especially children nowadays.
Painting activites like colors are more natural and it becomes easier
to use point-and click games/activities that
Naz -
Thanks for the thoughts!
IMHO it's better to delay the release of the 1.75 and force putting in
a touchscreen.
It's not a matter of time, it's a matter of the price deployments are willing
to pay for it. The feedback we've heard so far is that since the XO-1.75
without a touchscreen
IMHO the next XO would be irrelevant to the public without it
as it would offer no significant change outside the hood from the 1.5.
No, but an XO-1.75 that uses half the power and therefore provides twice the
battery life is an XO that is now available to many children who don't have
the
Hi all,
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip from Marvell -- the Armada 610/MMP2.
There's still a great deal of
Congrats!!
-walter
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Hi all,
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
Yay!
- Bert -
On 10.11.2010, at 22:01, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi all,
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip from
Hey, that looks a lot like the conference rooms *I've* been spending
weeks in! ;-)
--scott
--
( http://cscott.net/ )
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
I notice in the dmesg printout that the BogoMips for this initial
XO-1.75 version is less than for the G1G1 XO-1.
mikus
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Hi,
I notice in the dmesg printout that the BogoMips for this initial
XO-1.75 version is less than for the G1G1 XO-1.
BogoMIPS, of course, being the ultimate measure of CPU performance..
The most obvious reason why this isn't a meaningful comparison, which
isn't to say that there aren't
Mikus -
Well, there's a reason Linus called them BogoMips, isn't there?
- Ed
On Nov 10, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
I notice in the dmesg printout that the BogoMips for this initial
XO-1.75 version is less than for the G1G1 XO-1.
mikus
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Hi all,
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Chris Ball c...@laptop.org wrote:
Hi all,
OLPC Engineering had a trip to Taipei for the XO-1.75 motherboard
bringup last week. The 1.75 machine lives in the same industrial
design (display, case, batteries) as the XO-1/XO-1.5, but uses an
ARM system-on-chip
27 matches
Mail list logo
