The idea of open-source hardware is slowly slowly but surely gaining traction. VIA Technologies, Inc., joined in on the fun today by unveiling an open source reference platform for low power notebooks, based on its own processor technology (obviously). The CAD files have been released under a Creative Commons license. The machine is tentatively named OpenBook.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2006-11-08
Define "popular" please.
On one of the linked sites they talk about Ubuntu and SUSE. And.. G/OS. Seriously, I never heard about it. And it's not in the Top 300something of Distrowatch either (even though that doesn't say much).
So what exactly do they mean with "popular"?
Member since:2006-01-24
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gos
Gos is number 30 on distrowatch at the moment
Member since:2005-07-06
It is GOS on Distrowatch and is at #30 presently. I have never used it but if I recall correctly it was the distro preinstalled on the Linux PCs from Walmart. Beyond that and the factor that it is an Ubuntu derivative I do not know much about it. It has seen commercial distribution before though so I would not classify it as obscure.
Is it just me or does $500 for a starting price seem a bit high to be in competition with the EEE? I would be interested in it to be sure but I would have to classify it in a slightly different market with the probable $600-800 price tag for a configured system.
Member since:2005-11-11
EEE PC 900 is $550. The 901 is set to be $650. I think $500 is well competitive with that 
The specs are ballpark. If they can put an Isaiah in it when that comes out the processor should be competitive (though until then, the c7 is as noted a little anemic). Hard Drive instead of flash is a negative for some, a positive for others (space), though there's no reason someone couldn't stick a flash drive in there.
So yeah, price is a little higher than the EEE 2g surf, but $500 is lower than the current EEEs.
/disclosure: Just ordered an EEE myself. Happy with the choice. I like flash drive, and slightly smaller size. But I wouldn't rule out the OpenBook.
Edited 2008-05-28 00:46 UTC
Member since:
2007-04-11
I like this company more and more each time I read something about them and plan to refit all my pcs with Via processors.
Just got to love their concepts and think its the way forward for us in the developing world amidst the current energy challenges.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/27/via-openbook-hands-on/
GO Via!
Edited 2008-05-27 23:40 UTC
Member since:2005-12-31
Member since:
2006-05-19
Member since:2005-08-28
Member since:
2007-09-06
How has the design of their processors been coming along? I don't have anything against them really, I like their mini-itx boards, however back in the day when I "upgraded" from a 486dx4 100mhz to a Cyrix PR200 (150mhz), I gained some processor cycles with a huge sacrifice to floating point operations. We benchmarked that thing and it basically said the floating point compared to a 80287 coprocessor... around 1998-99.
IIRC, which I may not 
, I believe that the VIA chips are originally based off the flawed Cyrix processors, does the new VIA versions fare any better?
Or maybe I just ramble nonsense?
Member since:2005-12-31
Member since:2006-01-03
I'm afraid this is mostly nonsense - perhaps due to a badly written benchmark program (not uncommon). Actually, the Cyrix FPU needed 4-7 cycles to do a FADD (a typical operation) while the i387 needed 23-34, and the i287 took 70-100 cycles to do the same.
Regarding FSQRT (important in many early 3D games) the numbers are 59-60 for Cyrix, 122-129 for the i387, and 180-186 for the i287.
On integer code, the Cyrix chip was faster than a Pentium, "clock for clock", and thus much faster than a i486 (see datasheets).
Also, while VIA sold the Cyrix designs for a while, the IDT/Centaur-designed C3 and C7 has nothing to do with the Cyrix chips, at least not regaring technical solutions used.
/Best Regards
Member since:
2005-12-31
[quote]...coupled with the higher levels of performance..[/quote]
I read it through twice before I believed my eyes that they are claiming this. Yu know what higher levels of performance means when your YouTube video jitters...
I really regret buying the VIA PC2500 mother board as it performs terribly (either CPU or disk controller wise) and it's not really that cheap. I can get a comparable (and certainly better) AOpen P-M MB + CPU for the same amount of money, even using roughly the same amount of electricity, maybe?
Member since:
2007-12-22
Member since:2007-02-05
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2005-07-06
(the cruel reality is... this manufacture partners are using plain common proprietary CAD... sad, but true...)
the cruel reality is that there is no open-source cad application availabel (only some little sketching-tools)
and for file-formats it only gets as open as dxf and xt
Member since:2007-02-17
Quite a few of these Linux CAD applications:
http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html
http://linuxgazette.net/issue54/frost.html
http://www.roseindia.net/linux/linux-cad-software.shtml
http://caladan.nanosoft.ca/software.php
... are considerably more capable than "some little sketching-tools".
http://www.cad-schroer.com/index.php?screen=1.3&ziel=Products-M...
http://www.ribbonsoft.com/qcad.html
http://www.varicad.com/en/home/
A number of them (such as Qcad) are open source.
There is even an option for PCB layout and production:
http://www.cadsoft.de/info.htm
Edited 2008-05-29 03:37 UTC
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-12-22
The open standard is DXF (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DXF).
Edited 2008-05-28 17:24 UTC
Member since:
2007-07-03
I still remember the cyrix chip. Oh man it was bad, my PC would hang suddenly and so many compatibilies issue
Anyway this would make a good low cost smart client laptop. Running Windows player and browser locally and running processor intensive apps on the server via ThinServer
http://www.aikotech.com/thinserver.htm
Member since:
2006-09-30
