Slashdot Mirror

http://pc104.org/

There are also BTX, which was an Intel attempt at a smaller format but which has been superseded by micro-ATX and flex-ATX since they, unlike BTX, are compatible with ATX cases.

I think I mentioned DTX, which AMD introduced specifically for HTPC and such.

Intel also had WTX specifically for servers and high-end workstations. It was even larger than EATX, but the extra size is really unnecessary these days since you can get dual-socket boards in EATX. Most quad-socket boards are in a form factor called SSI MEB, which is about the same size WTX was. There are also SSI CEB and SSI MEB in that SSI family. Notice Wikipedia knows little about SSI.

Then there's the ETX and XTX family which are actually COM systems rather than true motherboards.

Then there's all the non-?TX stuff like NLX, LPX, EBX, EPIC, and a few more besides. Then there are all the proprietary boards out there.

For a pretty good comparison of the more common formats, Wikipedia has a computer motherboard form factor article and several individual articles for ATX, NLX, LPX, etc.

Then there's formfactors.org which, as the name suggests, is a whole site dedicated to documenting and reporting news updates on motherboard form factors. They have comparisons, specs, guides, info on testing equipment for system designers and builders, and list news on updates to specs and such on their main page.

Then there are embedded systems company sites and small-board enthusiast sites like smallformfactor.com (industry journal), mini-itx.com (small system enthusiasts_), pc104.com (list of PC/104 part suppliers), PC/104 Consortium, and places like Embedded Planet which sells embedded computer stuff including even more specialized small form factors, like AMC, PCI, microPCI, PrPMC, and other "industrial" form factors that typically require a chassis and backplane system designed for rack mounting in the industrial control or telecommunications applications.

(Warning: all links PDF) Maybe you'd like an EPIC, EBX, or if you want two systems in not much more than the space of a 5.25" drive, a PC/104. Get PC/104+ and you'll have a PCI bus instead of just ISA. You can stack them with modules that do just about anything. And they're cheap, like $100-$600 depending on CPU, all the way up to Core2 Duo.

That said, why is everyone evaluating an embedded system using criteria usually applied to laptops and/or desktops. Does no one here ever do (or even know about) embedded work anymore?

(Warning: all links PDF) Maybe you'd like an EPIC, EBX, or if you want two systems in not much more than the space of a 5.25" drive, a PC/104. Get PC/104+ and you'll have a PCI bus instead of just ISA. You can stack them with modules that do just about anything. And they're cheap, like $100-$600 depending on CPU, all the way up to Core2 Duo.

That said, why is everyone evaluating an embedded system using criteria usually applied to laptops and/or desktops. Does no one here ever do (or even know about) embedded work anymore?

(Warning: all links PDF) Maybe you'd like an EPIC, EBX, or if you want two systems in not much more than the space of a 5.25" drive, a PC/104. Get PC/104+ and you'll have a PCI bus instead of just ISA. You can stack them with modules that do just about anything. And they're cheap, like $100-$600 depending on CPU, all the way up to Core2 Duo.

That said, why is everyone evaluating an embedded system using criteria usually applied to laptops and/or desktops. Does no one here ever do (or even know about) embedded work anymore?

(Warning: all links PDF) Maybe you'd like an EPIC, EBX, or if you want two systems in not much more than the space of a 5.25" drive, a PC/104. Get PC/104+ and you'll have a PCI bus instead of just ISA. You can stack them with modules that do just about anything. And they're cheap, like $100-$600 depending on CPU, all the way up to Core2 Duo.

That said, why is everyone evaluating an embedded system using criteria usually applied to laptops and/or desktops. Does no one here ever do (or even know about) embedded work anymore?

(Warning: all links PDF) Maybe you'd like an EPIC, EBX, or if you want two systems in not much more than the space of a 5.25" drive, a PC/104. Get PC/104+ and you'll have a PCI bus instead of just ISA. You can stack them with modules that do just about anything. And they're cheap, like $100-$600 depending on CPU, all the way up to Core2 Duo.

That said, why is everyone evaluating an embedded system using criteria usually applied to laptops and/or desktops. Does no one here ever do (or even know about) embedded work anymore?

The industrial computing world has evolved its standards on small-size computers years ago. One particularly strong standard is PC/104, which offers 3.6 x 3.8" board size with ready solutions for extensibility (ISA in the original, PCI, and now even PCI-Express). It is supported by dozens of vendors and compatible extension boards are available for many purposes. Another more recent standard is EPIC, which offers more board space (and more functionality) combined with PC/104 extensibility in a 4.5" by 6.5" package. Both standards are for industrial use and therefore the products are long-lived and usually more stable than their consumer-oriented counterparts. Unfortunately, this also affects the prices, which puts those solutions out of range for everyone but the most wealthy hobbyists :)

The industrial computing world has evolved its standards on small-size computers years ago. One particularly strong standard is PC/104, which offers 3.6 x 3.8" board size with ready solutions for extensibility (ISA in the original, PCI, and now even PCI-Express). It is supported by dozens of vendors and compatible extension boards are available for many purposes. Another more recent standard is EPIC, which offers more board space (and more functionality) combined with PC/104 extensibility in a 4.5" by 6.5" package. Both standards are for industrial use and therefore the products are long-lived and usually more stable than their consumer-oriented counterparts. Unfortunately, this also affects the prices, which puts those solutions out of range for everyone but the most wealthy hobbyists :)

...when we have PC104?

Has been on the market for ages, is well established and to me one of the neatest designs since the S100 bus.

Run, do not walk to the patent office. Oh wait, You mean something like this http://www.pc104.org/

I remember designing with the PC/104 bus how naturally cube-shaped the results were. It was a serious limitation with packaging and mounting because no single dimension could be less than four inches. (E.g. some large flat areas were available but unusable.) Odd that a satellite might be the worlds most ideal packaging for PC/104 applications.

... unfortunately it looks ugly.

It has however, have a standard spec: http://www.pc104.org/technology/PDF/PC104%20Spec%2 0v2_5.pdf
and has been around for quite some time (1992 by the looks of that document)

Random pictures for the uninitiated:

• http://www.ncsu.edu/stud_orgs/ar/images/pc104.jpg
• http://symmetry.com.au/symres/index_files/image012 .jpg
• http://eri.ca.sandia.gov/eri/pics/stack3.jpg

You mean like PC104?

If you're going on about size... why don't you go for PC/104 format? 96x96mm...

http://www.pc104.org/

PC/104 is a standard for embedded computers, based on ISA (and now PCI with PC/104 Plus). There are many companies that offer PC/104 compatible products, both single board computers (SBCs) and add-on modules for GPS, wireless networking, all kinds of digital or analog I/O, motor control, DSPs, etc. etc. The boards are a little over 3.5" square and vary in price, typically $200-$600, with processors from a 386 to a Pentium III. They are typically industrial-temperature qualified and shock-hardened, and used in many applications in robotics, avionics, factory automation and other places where small, harsh-environment computers are needed.

Second thought: what is the difference between 104 and 105 key keyboards, anyway? Whenever I do a Linux install, I never have the energy to count them (and which ones do you count?). I just go with 105, figuring it must be better.

Third thought: here's a link to the PC/104 site. I still don't understand what it is, exactly, but then I'm just another person holding forth here on computing despite knowing nothing about non-desktop systems.

This always struck me as a good way to build a PC, if you don't need a high-powered system with lots of peripherals. Is anybody doing much with it these days, or has it pretty much died out?

last year's winners

Ampro has been making tiny motherboards for years. (as have other companies, of course)

I have a board made by them that's exactly the right size, and with mounting holes in the right place, to fit in a 5 1/4" drive bay (dated 1995). Of course it doesn't work, but that's why I have it. :)

In particular, PC/104-Plus form factor boards are 3.6" x 3.8", which is about 9.1x9.7 cm.

Sounds like they've reinvented PC-104. Only bigger. Wish they'd stuck with the established standard.

It isn't that much smaller than the iDot mini-ITX machines (I'm just a customer, I've bought a bunch for various embedded applications), which, by the time you stuff in some RAM you had lying around anyway are under $200. If you're going to spend an extra $295 for a display and a few buttons, going super small and super low power with one of the gazillion PC104 vendors seems smarter.

In my house we have two laptops with 802.11b that are almost always close at hand, so running the whole thing headless and just using one of those laptops with a web browser to control the media center seems like the obvious choice.

I need to finish up with code for the web server and media play control, but I've got some instructions on building one of these to boot off CompactFlash into stripped down Linux if anyone cares.

There's also the PC/104 Specification (PDF) and the PC/104-Plus Specification (PDF).

There's also the PC/104 Specification (PDF) and the PC/104-Plus Specification (PDF).

Lets try that again shall we....

pc104.org and Google PC104 results.

from PC104.org FAQ

Q. We are a company considering using the PC/104
standard in an embedded system. One big worry
that we need to get answered, before even
thinking of using this standard in our
products, is: What is the future of PC/104
when Microsoft has announced not to support
in the future the ISA bus (that is, PC/104)?

A. Despite the "PC99" recommendations of
Microsoft and Intel, which eliminate the need
for the ISA bus, Intel (and others) have
promised to keep current ISA chipsets alive
for at least five to seven years. There are
many PC/104-based "real world" interfaces
from hundreds of manufacturers, and these are
not going to become obsolete just because the
desktop PC does not require or use ISA slots
anymore.

Functions such as analog I/O, digital I/O,
motion control, and custom application
interfaces can still take advantage of low
cost and design simplicity of the ISA bus.
Contrary to Microsoft's and Intel's marketing
focus, the 386 and 486 processors are still
the most popular in PC/104-based embedded
systems, with Pentium designs only recently
becoming available on a wide scale.

The PC/104 Consortium added PCI to PC/104,
resulting in PC/104-Plus (= ISA bus PLUS PCI
bus), in order to allow high speed processors
such as the Intel Pentium to utilize higher
speed I/O bandwidth to achieve their full
potential in embedded systems. The PC/104-
Plus standard, with its PCI in addition to
ISA bus, provides a long-term future for
PC/104. Manufacturers of PC/104 modules now
have three choices from which to choose, all
within the industry standard PC/104 form-
factor:(1) ISA bus only; (2) PCI plus ISA
buses; and (3) PCI bus only.

Despite the popularity of PCI in desktop PCs,
there will continue to be an advantage to having
two separate buses in many embedded
system applications: PCI bus, for high speed
block data transfers (e.g. video, networking,
disk storage); and ISA bus, for byte-oriented
(e.g. real-world data acquisition and
control).

Today, 80% to 90% of PC/104 form-factor
modules are using ISA bus only. Within
approximately five years, it is likely that
there will be greater than 50% using the PCI
bus. It will probably take ten years before
the situation of today is reversed, with 80%
to 90% of PC/104 form-factor modules using
PCI bus only. Even so, ISA will still be
supported on PC/104-Plus modules, ten years
from now.

What Is PC/104?
PC/104 (IEEE P996.1) was developed to fill the need for an embedded platform, which was compliant with standardized hardware and software of the PC architecture. Mechanically quite different from the PC form factor, PC/104 modules are 3.6 X 3.8 inches in size. A self-stacking bus is implemented with pin-and-socket connectors composed of 64- and 40- contact male/female headers, which replace the card edge connectors used in standard PC hardware. Virtually anything that is available for a standard PC is available in the PC/104 form factor. PC/104 components are designed to be stacked together to create a complete embedded solution. Normally there will be a single CPU board and several peripheral boards connected by the PC/104 (ISA) system bus. Often there will be a PCI bus provided by the CPU board that will accommodate PCI peripheral boards (this standard is called PC/104+). Overall the price point for a highly integrated PC/104 CPU module is lower than for a comparable IBM-compatible PC. However, due to the power dissipation constraints typically found in embedded applications, CPU horsepower is generally lower. For more look at the PC/104 consortium site.

Depending on what you want the computer to do. The PC/104 measures 3.8" X 3.6" consumes far less power than a standard PC system. Avaliable from a 8088 to Pentium type processor.

http://www.pc104.com
http://www.pc104.org

Another point, is that your Lab isn't very good at programming/implementing bots. Assuming you're using a PIC microcontroller

Wow, that's a really nice assertion. I would like to point out that the RHex robot co-developed by our lab and a few other universities is arguably the most successful walking/running robot in the world. It is probably the most reliable ambulatory robot ever built and is currently undergoing field demonstrations at SwRI in Texas.

BTW, the robot uses a PC-104 stack running QNX. Yes, there's a PIC on it, incorporated on a custom PC-104 board, among all the other control electronics. It's not programmed with run-of-the-mill Radio-Shack "min/max control code" like your "basic claw-bot". Have a look at the papers written on RHex and the other robots and maybe you'll learn a thing or two about robotics.

The nice thing about current motherboard fab processes is that they are cheap. Populating both side of the board is possible, but rather expensive. It requires more layers (which make the board more expensive to make and more difficult to debug). Also, it requires very different physical manufacturing facilities, since the presence of components on the reverse side makes putting pressure on the topside difficult. When the robots punch down components on the top, they could squash, crack or bend componets on the other if the board isn't sitting on a specially designed caddy. As you might imagine, it's possible to do the same thing when you have the board at home when installing componets. (Zero insertion force my foot!) There are also issues of cooling, since a the board would require airflow on both sides (which could mean a bigger case in a worst-case situation!).

Of course, if these issues can be addressed with a sane form factor standard, I think everyone would be happy to have smaller computers. Smaller is better, so long as it doesn't apply to things that would require you to buy an expensive car to compensate.

Personally, I think one of the major limitations of the ATX standard is the breakout. If there were a standard IO block that connected to the motherboard with a cable, you would have a lot more freedom when it came to positioning the board inside the case. Old AT motherboards did this for everything except the keyboard connector, I seem to recall. It would be a little more complicated to install, but I think it would be better.

Or, we could just make mass market PC104 stacks for everything.

Wow, sounds like PC/104 PC104.org A system for embeded computers.

Well, you could start with some pc-104 components, add a pcmcia module, an LCD control module, etc. Or you could base it off of one of many SBC's available in the EBX little board format such as this one from Ampro. Then you just have to find an open-frame LCD to use, pick some drives and fabricate your own case. Easy right ;-).

I don't know what's wrong with your present solution, since it seems like you've got a working setup. However, you could get yourself a keyboard, mouse and lcd monitor, and hook them up to a PC/104 single-board computer to accomplish what you're after.

I want it to work like my CD and DVD player - turn it on, and a few seconds later it is ready to go.

I set up a PC/104 with Linux, it booted (from its Solid State disc) in about 10-15 seconds.

Check out the PC/104 website.

Well I tried to post some links, but nothing shows, so I don't know if it was lost. So just in case, here you are: http://reality.sgi.com/kjw_engr /Wearables/pc104.htm, http://wearables.blu.org/hardwear.html , http://www.rtdusa.com/pc104men.htm and www.pc104.org

• PC/104 is simply an ISA bus that is stackable for small cards (see for instance the picture on top at http://www.pc104.com/
• PC/104+ is the same idea with a PCI-bus. Drawback: I only saw a handful of PC/104+ products in the huge amount of PC/104 products (since the only actual use I would have for this would be a 100 Mbps router, I postponed my dreams :-)

I hope that PC/104(+) will become widely commercially successful, so that we start to see the prices dropping, and might have a chance to get fun assembling micro-PCs :-)