Talk:Gen2 Hardware ideas

From OLPC

Revision as of 01:56, 9 January 2009 by 85.241.215.179 (Talk)
(diff) ← Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Looking for the best hardware possible, efficient and cheap, I've found only one that fits and actually can do it all, from I/O control to processing, even sound and VGA outputs... 40 efficient CPUs in a Chip, each available to it's own task, all with a fraction of a Watt of power, available to emulate any circuit, from VGA to wireless.

http://www.intellasys.net/

The downsizes are:

  • Any peripheral (Ram included) should comunicate in serial mode (not a real problem, not to a portable PC at least).
  • the need to program everything, but taking in to account a Small OS like Menuet <http://www.menuetos.net/> the OX3 it is certainly doable at us$10 the hardware and the remaining dependent on the VGA touch-screens. (same as above)
  • Current industry will look for it as a menace though it would be an extra, not competition to existing products.

The upsides are:

  • Low power usage.
  • Cheap. 40 efficient Cpu's are cheaper that only one x86 (or ARM) inefficient CPU.
  • Power. Each of the 40 CPUs are powerful enough for the OS, or any application.

So: The higher power needed and price tag will come from the VGA. (current XO hardware has contoured that problem)

Is there the will ?!? Since this would be a change that would compromise big-business, it is doubtful. Charles Moore work in uCPUs are being sabotaged for years. He offered an Home Internet Box for $5 and it was dropped. A funny 1996 story, with the predecessor of the intellasys CPU (An F21 single CPU chip), can be found at http://www.ultratechnology.com/scope.htm

Quoting Ultratecnology site:

My idea of a cheap PC had some things in common with MIT's new $100 One Laptop per Child project, except my idea was that, what the world needed was a good $5 computer that was as simple to understand as the cost implied. We got pretty close at iTV with the Forthchip module that we could build for about $5 that fit into the battery compartment of a $19 (retail) B/W TV AM/FM which let it connect to the Internet for email and web browsing. iTV never sold any of them let alone the volume needed to sell those miniature Imac-like machines for $49. And UltraTechnology's Workstation in a Mouse demostrated that a mouse with an F21 would cost about the same as an ordinary $10 mouse and only needed an RGB monitor or TV to play and surf. iTV did come close to closing a couple of those billion unit type deals.

No comments needed...Back to OLC: But will (again) someone take the KISS rule into account to make GREAT (instead if BIG) system (and OS) that would be available anywhere for less that $50? (assuming $40 to be cost of the VGA)... or even us$10 if a TV is used (making more sense in remote places and with a price more realistic to some countries were one TV in a village is a luxury)...

Such option would be useful: - One Keyboard with the Computer inside using an existing TV by $10. - cables or no cables depending if you would use 1 chip or 2 (One at the keyboard, another cable connected to the TV)... THAT would be a real luxury!!! as it would cost $20 instead of $10... See what the problems are?

Dutra de Lacerda <http://Factor-H.com>

It's been done... many times

Dutra said: "Such option would be useful: - One Keyboard with the Computer inside using an existing TV by $10. - cables or no cables depending if you would use 1 chip or 2 (One at the keyboard, another cable connected to the TV)... THAT would be a real luxury!!! as it would cost $20 instead of $10... See what the problems are?"

There was a host of "computer in a small box hooked to your TV" systems in the 1970s: the Radio Shack Color Computer, the Commodore VIC 20 and C64, (and the Apple II, for that matter). Undobutedly, these (or something similar) could be reimplemented today for $5 to $50. But one thing we learned from those is an analog (NTSC) TV makes a lousy computer display. And a TV has a lot of extra circuitry that draws power to no purpose, compared to a dedicated, integral display. Also, how many surplus TVs are available to the "target market" for the XO-2? And what broadcast standard would they be using? -- Davewa 18:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

SeaForth Chip can emulate ANY peripheral

Any broadcast standard can be used, PAL NTSC...

Naturally USB2 can be updated to USB3 just by reprogramming the node (one of the 40 CPUs) that was attributed to that task. Same with Wireless... or whatever you need. Emulating a device was done with the OLD Sinclair ZX-80, so the Z80 would emulate a B/W TV circuitry. Nothing new from there.

However this particular chip has 40 extremely efficient CPUs, each available to a particular task and connected to the the near CPUs to do extra work:

Featuring the smallest core size design (0.13 mm2), 
the SEAforth chip consumes 28 times less power 
while running 240 times faster than competing architectures. 
-- From SeaForth documentation.

But answering the particular case of the using the TV option that certainly would not be a one-per-child, I agree. But for what I've seen, it would cover the needs where there are TVs in usage. And that's an option.

The idea is: You'll find difficult to give one Laptop to everyone when food and health are more important and where the value of the toy is absurdly high while being apparently low. Well... the make it absurdly low so it may be given away as a gift (hopping not a rotten one) to some... or affordable to other (countries).

The point is: You will never find a common solution were realities are such diverse. You need to diversify. And yes: It can be, and should be, a common platform were efforts are common on an hardware able to evolve. That's just the point of emulated devices: You will NOT be dropped behind by new standards, your hardware will adapt with the proper new driver.

And any commercial (even free) OSs will be a flawed one as they becoming bigger and more demanding, not to do real WORK or allow REAL communication, but to please the cosmetic trend of the moment or the need fancy games. Education has different objectives: Communication of Information to achieve Knowledge and allow Wisdom.

Note the evolution of the 3 above: Information alone is useless. Knowledge alone may be a waste. Most professionals have a lot of information and no knowledge to solve any real problems. They are biological robots, living databases of undigested information.

However every village in the planet has his wise old man with old wisdom being lost destroyed by a so-called technocratic civilization when reality is that it really become a pseudo-civilization DEPENDENT of the technology that is killing the whole planet. Old ways and wisdom MUST be saved.

Communication is a way to enhance the capabilities now being lost. And to enhance cooperation in solving particular problems.. IF there is such will. And may allow the independence and self-sustainability of communities by the share of particular knowledge (most needed where the cities of today are in a path to destruction) since the only real valuable assets are the land (or sea) that feeds us and the knowledge to keep the land fertile and the community protected from the environment and itself (overpopulation can only be avoided by self-destruction or self-awareness).

Where communities are self sustainable they are the only ones to escape the technocratic dependent pseudo-civilization that is so dependent of so many failing things and so alienating and unreal. "THE HUMAN ZOO" (written more than 40 years ago) is a must read to have a notion of what is posted here.

A computer is certainly a loose motivation to keep the current failed education paradigma (it just produces pieces to an economical machine in self destruction mode - like a cancer)... But as a connective element for awareness it may be very useful... if people still have the wisdom to decide to use it correctly. Certainly EDUCATION is much more than merely INFORMATION... CULTURE is much more than FORMAL "education"... So much that I personally see the OLPC relevant if CHILD is replaced by COMMUNITY. But I'm not sure, so it's just an idea.

So: this is only a personal opinion by the lonely philosopher I am, one that gives more credit to Wisdom than to the Information that still has to be digested in knowledge. Naturally I could be over-confident in give that use to the little beast once itself is a techno-dependent product. But an equilibrium is needed very fast, or we all collapse like it happens every 12k years, (not accepted by present official "history") and become just a memory of times where some wonders were done, only reminded in old writings like the Indian Vedas and the rest of the world legends.

If Humanity has to grow to be worth of what it can now do... (or let it be destroyed by their stupid selfishness) so this could be just a small pin where every pin makes the needed difference. That's the whole reason of my interest and suggestions... a chance (between many) in achieving that goal: Self-Sustainability with Self-Awareness in a Decentralized new world. Not a formal education for a dying insane economical machine, but an opportunity to make questions, to be creative, to share.

This in naturally in opposition to the World Chaos of dependent economies (created by the usage of centralized energy and resulting in the centralized political powers). These are threatening OUR common future as we can ALL confirm in the only virtual-reality most of us live by: The mass media and the artificial dependencies people, and nations, become used to accept with the results that can be seen by everyone... So present nobody sees, like a fish also does not see the water.

Just a small pin... when and were every one is needed. Some people, at least, will understand. They may make the difference. Dutra de Lacerda <http://Factor-H.com>

Personal tools
  • Log in
  • Login with OpenID
About OLPC
About the laptop
About the tablet
Projects
OLPC wiki
Toolbox