Slashdot Mirror
Terra Soft Withdraws Plans for PowerPC Motherboards
DamienMcKenna writes "Terra Soft has just announced it is not going to produce PPC motherboards: 'We regret having launched a product initiative and built expectations prior to receiving first shipment. We have clearly learned a powerful lesson and do extend our apology to you, our existing and potential customers. As the Teron mainboard and associated systems will be made available through other resellers, we will encourage them to sign-on as official Yellow Dog Linux resellers in order that we may continue to support movement of what we hope to be a very popular product.' This leaves Genesi as the only company who still has PowerPC motherboards for sale, with a new board design due later this year."
.....cluster of vaporware!
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
IBM seems serious about the new PowerPC 970 chip working with lower end workstations. Hopefully they'll provide inexpensive motherboards for use with the chips so that reasonably priced PPC linux systems become a reality.
Remeber the good old days and the promise of CHRP (Common Hardware Reference Platform.). It seemed like such a good idea but just never took off when apple killed macos for CHRP.
Maybe Apple will allow clones again, but I'm not holding my breath.
I mean, it's not like there hasn't been mac clones before. And if y'all remember it didn't work out all that well, for Apple OR the clone makers, IIRC.
And back in the days I remember the clones (and maybe apple in general?) would have windows emulation that would run pretty much anything (that's before the directX days) you wanted... now that I think about it, I really wonder why so few switched over - I mean, back then Apple wasn't cheap either, but neither was PCs, to tell the truth...
Granted, Apple design wasn't as artistically meticulous as today either. The mac community, I think, had about the same amount of elitist / snobishness though. Actually Linux community too - except no KDE / Gnome / etc that we all take for granted.
Ahh the old days.
Anyway - Hardly doubt this will impact the mac world...
My life in the land of the rising sun.
I'm too lazy to read the damned article, but did this have anything to do with Apple? I thought the point of these PowerPC mobos was to run YellowDog Linux or something similar? How would Apple stop someone from building a system with a Motorola/IBM PowerPC chip? Of course this may be all explained in the article, but this is Slashdot
enisi are not the only company. Eyetech also produce PPC mother boards and you can actually buy them unlike the Genisi boards (which they are no longer making).
http://www.eyetech.co.uk/
http://www.eyetech.co.uk/amigaone/
I had been looking at getting one of the G3 600mhz jobbies as a spare box for a server, cause of the different arch then x86, and its bloody friggin hard to find boards that arnt from apple.
a rchCat=AMA1 is what I had bookmarked as the search for their PPC stuff.
There is a place in the UK which sells G3 and G4 boards and procs for Amiga systems (really cool that the new OS3 runs off of PPC), but with VAT, its a pain to import them back to America.
For those interested: http://www.eyetech.co.uk/search.php?SearchStr=&Se
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
Uh, you can still buy an AmigaOne from Eyetech . (The AmigaOne uses the exact same reference design as the Teron, and is more or less the same thing, although the firmware chip has some different stuff on it for running AmigaOS).
There are also various resellers who will sell you one if you do a little searching.
Supplies are a little bumpy (shipment stopped for a little while while waiting for a newer board revision that fixed some issues with the northbridge), but I know people who have AmigaOnes already. (Regular people, not just people in developers like Hyperion (us))
We were truly excited to bring this particular ATX PowerPC Linux product to market.
You get excited over that and you think the halting of the atx PPC is your biggest problem?
PPC is great in theory, troble is in the real world its just so damn expensive you may as well go the x86 route. its actually so much cheaper that the cost of having the architechure fail is balenced by the fact you can go down the street and buy a replacement. I like PPC, its a nice archatechure, but its exensive, and its still coming out of the old propietary days. I'll be interested to see if it survives to become at least a little mainstream
there is no space in the third "search" before =AMA1....
We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
Terra Soft ATX PowerPC Systems
Terra Soft Current and Pending Customers,
7 April 2003
"Terra Soft Solutions has determined that it is not, at this point in time, prudent to carry the Teron mainboards nor offer Teron-based Boxer systems. This is as great a disappointment for us as it is for many of you. We were truly excited to bring this particular ATX PowerPC Linux product to market.
If you have read the rumor mills, there are a variety of supposed reasons why we have been delayed in shipping, including unqualified statements and speculation at best. It is our corporate policy to not address specific issues regarding any strategic relationship within a public forum, where fact and fiction are not easily discernable, and our fiduciary responsibility to our customers, shareholders, and industry associates may be compromised.
We regret having launched a product initiative and built expectations prior to receiving first shipment. We have clearly learned a powerful lesson and do extend our apology to you, our existing and potential customers.
As the Teron mainboard and associated systems will be made available through other resellers, we will encourage them to sign-on as official Yellow Dog Linux resellers in order that we may continue to support movement of what we hope to be a very popular product."
Kai Staats, CEO
Terra Soft Solutions, Inc.
There are other PowerPC motherboard suppliers our there still, notably Genesi Sarl which ships a Micro-ATX board of its own design, as opposed to the OEMed Mai Teron board that both TerraSoft and Eyetech have been licensing. There are a limited number of Pegasos 1 motherboards available from Genesi and a Pegasos 2 motherboard is in development for release later this year. Additionally Eyetech has been pre-selling their "AmigaONE" boards, which as I mentioned are based on the old Mai Teron design.
Please note that the current Peagsos 1 boards use the same chipset as the Teron boards, except for the addition of a chip dubbed the April which fixes some bugs in the chipset. The new Pegasos 2 boards will use a completely different chipset from Marvell.
Is it possible to build a machine w/ one of these mobos and run OS X on it?
...is why this would have been a Good Thing in the first place. I'm genuinely curious about this, but why would anyone shell out cash for a PPC mobo that only supported G3s? It's a good chip, yeah, but for similar cash you could get a much better x86 solution and run some variety of Linux on it, no?
Obviously there must be some advantages to a PPC board running YDL as compared to an x86 board running a comparable Linux distro that I don't understand, but I can't imagine what sort of market would pay for a board that would run such an aging processor.
Why is this in the Apple category? What does Linux running on a non-Apple PPC motherboard have to do with Apple?
A quick Google search would give some indication as to why the submitter would want people to think of Genesi as the only option.
Now I'll be the first to admit that I'm not unbiased -- Google is a double-edged sword, but the original submission is pretty clear and blatant FUD.
This has nothing to do with Apple, the TerraSoft Teron board was strictly aimed at the Linux market.
According to the site, they are simply not going to sell them directly. They are still going to manufacture them for OEM partners.
bp
Not just any PPC board can directly boot Mac OS. Apple has some fiddly copyrighted bits in the firmware that take care of that. Mac OS needs some particular hardware in the machine to boot. Apple doesn't have some sanctified right to prevent the production of PPC boards especially if the boards in question are intended to run a non-Apple OS.
Now it is true that you could run Mac-On-Linux on one of these boards but that is hardly a threat to Apple. MOL has to rely on the underlying OS for it's hardware facilities so it won't automagically work with many things like cd burners the way a native boot of MacOS will. Not many people are going to buy these boards and even fewer of those will run MOL. No threat to Apple whatsoever.
It takes more than a motherboard with a PPC chip to build an Apple clone. Since these don't have an Apple chipset and Apple firmware they won't boot Mac OS. They aren't Mac clones.
Let's face it: what else could cause TerraSoft, which has a vested interest in being able to sell their own machines, from suddenly doing a complete 180 on selling PPC motherboards? Particularly when they speak of "learning a powerful lesson" when they never even managed to bring the boards to market?
Think about it. If Apple didn't step in, then how else could this have happened?
These boards won't contain a SWIM chip, Apple power manager chip, Apple firmware and some other fiddly bits to boot. A OS X install cd might not even start to boot and if it did it would probably lock up without so much as a Sad Mac.
Now, you could install Linux on of these and then Mac-On-Linux. That WILL let you run OSX but with non-accellerated video and no automagic use of attached periphreals.
Its interesting that the given reasons for dropping the PPC motherboard production by TerraSoft were so vague. It makes one wonder if the legendary Apple legal department made some kind of threat or crackdown on their effort. Notice also that TerraSoft puts the focus on encouraging other PPC motherboard buyers to become dealers of their Yellow Dog Linux OS; perhaps Apple wanted to keep TerraSoft tied to using their own hardware for TS' computer systems, fearing that a TerraSoft which was both hardware and OS independant would create a viable rival in the 'alternative' PC platform arena, where Apple resides essentially unchallenged. I'd love to get the full scoop on this ... anyone working @ TerraSoft care to make an AC post about this ?
This is the major problem with Apple, I think.
You raise some good points but I think there's an important piece of this equation that you're missing. The lack of clones is the major problem with Apple? Sure, it keeps prices high and marketshare low. It's true. It is the worst thing about the platform.
And yet, it is also the one single thing that makes them unique in the market and gives them value. The vertical integration they have (hardware/os/iapps) allows them to a) innovate their product line faster and more radically than some other hardware/software makers and b) allows them to sell an entire end-to-end solution (like firewire-imovie-idvd-superdrive) with a user experience better than anyone elses. These things are at the core of what makes Apple Apple. Take them away - take away the vertical integration by doing clones - and what you get is cheaper boxes and much rejoicing...and a dead/dying platform within 2 years because it has lost that which made it valuable to begin with.
Bonus point: Why should anyone care? Certainly Mac users should care, but others should, too. Apple has an influence on the personal computer industry that is vastly disproportionate to its marketshare. They innovate. Others follow. Therefore, a healthy Apple is good for the industry. Mac clones = bad for Apple = bad for the pc industry.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
"If apple opened its hardware up so that other manufactures could build it under licence..."
A hollow voice whispers, "VAXBI". There is no guarantee that the market will like this, particularly if someone believes it is in his interest to see to it that the market dislikes it. It also depends on just how strict that license is.
The Dual G4 Linux card:
Found here
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
I listened to a QT audio broadcast of an interview with TerraSofts's prez, as he talked about their choice of hardware for the boxer boxen. He couldn't really give concrete reasons that a 600Mhz G3 should carry droolfactor. He said stuff like "our webserver is a 350Mhz G3 running YDL. It handles all our traffic without any problems" and "I think people will be impressed at how well a G3 performs running YLD compared to faster machines. Its just that efficient."
:).
I even asked Terrasoft how they expected to compete with the 2nd hand mac market, and their response was as follows:
As a long time mac/PPC user, and linux hobbyist, I'm very
interested in buildling a custom atx PPC box. You guys are really
spearheading this market, so I guess all my requests should go to
you
Thank you, and yes.
Originally, the announced specs for just mobo+cpu was something
like $495 for a 600Mhz G3, and atx board. I realize that you're
probably positioning this as affordably as possible to grow the
platform. My concern is that there's no way I could pay that when I
can get either a 600Mhz iMac or 500Mhz B&W tower for just $100
more. Is the component price expected to come down any time soon?
It is an issue of volume of production. When volume of production
goes up, price comes down. We are not able to reduce the price at
this point in time. As for iMac and B&W, it is not appropriate to
compare a 4-yr old computer from eBay to a new computer with
Warranty.
Will there be options for faster G3 chips, or multiprocessor
configurations? You probably can't discuss most of this, what is
the expected price range for the G4 based teron board? Do you have
any benchmarks for a teron based linux system vs. a comparable
Macintosh offering (to show off the architectural advantages of the
Mai system, if any)?
We will be shipping an 800 MHz G4 CPU at approximately $650. The
demand for the G3s was limited in comparison to the G4s.
We do not at this time have benchmarks, but will in the near future.
Sincerely,
Amanda
------------
so basically, it was inappropriate to compare a teron board to "older systems" with similar hardware specs, and they had no benchmarks. I drafted a fairly inflamatory response outlining their extreme arrogance, which I havn't sent, but I'm pretty sure they got the message without me.
This is where I get my recommended daily allowance of "Foot in Mouth."
You are so blindsided by the fact that Apple uses PowerPC chips that you are ignoring the fact that Apple's operating systems simply would not work at all on these boards, and Apple would never support these motherboards. The boot system on these motherboards is not even OpenFirmware as on most (PCI and later) Apple PPC computers - they used the new and open PPCBoot. Apple cared about them using PPC-based computers about as much as they cared about any embedded manufacturer using PPC-based systems. The processors TerraSoft planned to use were not even close to competing with the latest G4 1GHz and faster, and especially the dual G4 processors Apple is using in their desktop computers.
The processor speed was in fact much of the problem. The motherboards were expected to start at $500 for a a board that was less than spectacular, with a PPC750 (G3) processor running at 600MHz. Total system cost was not successfully reduced enough to make it worthwhile to many systems integrators, operating systems porters, etc.
They were in a catch-22. The systems needed to come down in price to gain wide spread acceptance, and they needed wide spread acceptance to come down in price. The competition is so stiff for servers and clusters that it was hard to compete. It is indeed sad.
See, it's not Apple - it's PowerPC damn it!. Apple is not PowerPC and PowerPC is not Apple.
BTW who needs Apple clones so the Apple world becomes in just a parallel x86 world? I don't really see the need. Apple is based on control: control comes at a price, but provides guarantees to those willing to pay for it. You buy an Apple and you know the quality of the what you're getting (overall, hardware and software)- even if you're not an enthusiast.
What I did expect is an Apple story with the penguin icon. The other day it was the B.Gates icon (that post on Virtual PC).
God knows what's next.
Your argument is a rather absurd troll. Terra Soft wasn't planning on making Mac clones, they were going to use their own OS, Yellow Dog Linux. Apple stopping Terra Soft from making a PowerPC computer(based on an open motherboard design no less) is like HP stopping Dell from making Intel based systems with their own motherboard design.
Why is the parent moderated as insightful when it is obviously a troll ?
It was not intended as a troll. I use Macs at every opportunity (i.e. everywhere except work, where I have to use a Wintel and a Sun box). However, while I love Macs, I loathe Apple, and this is one of the reasons.
Last I knew it took more than just a powerpc motherboard and chip to run Mac OS or OS X. It's not like PCs. Apples have yet more proprietary shit in them that keeps you from running their OS.
You forget: Apple considers itself a hardware company. To them, the OS is quite literally nothing more than a draw to get people running their hardware. Apple doesn't care about DEC Alpha machines because they don't sell DEC Alpha machines. But any PPC machine, whether or not it's capable of running OSX, is a threat to them. Or at least, they think it is. Are they wrong? Hell yes. But it's what they believe, and neither you nor I is going to be able to convince them otherwise.
So. Shut the hell up and stop and stop being an ignorant, repugnant, ham headed troll.
You know, this is probably the first time I've ever been called a troll. I must say, I'm rather disappointed. I was hoping for an impressive, or at least a passable, flame.
There's no way Apple would allow it, because God forbid they'd actually have to do something competitive.
You have to be kidding me! Apple was what, about a 3-5% market share in a field dominated by a convicted monopoly? They are in one of the most cut-throat industries out there.
Apple competes daily against people like Dell and Gateway. When you are selling your product at $1200 (iMac) against other products that are about $600 for basically the same hardware feature, you better believe you are competing with something. Otherwise you are going to go out of business really quickly.
And I doubt we'll see any increase in their marketshare, no matter how deserved it may be, until they get off their freaking high horse and start actually trying to compete in the open market.
Yeah, maybe if they would build a better laptop or get a 1U product out there they would be doing better. Oh wait...
Like I said - Apple is competing. They are not competing against other PPC manufacturers, they are competing against the Wintel monopoly.
Apple stopped the clone business for a reason - Apple ended up trying to compete with the clone makers. As a result, they were ignoring their real competitors (the ones that could drive them out of business) - Dell, Compaq, Gateway, and others.
The clone business did not expand their 5%, it just split up that 5% among the clone manufacturers and Apple, meaning that Apple was not getting near as much revenue.
You will not see a major increase in Apple marketshare because it is competing against a monopoly in software and a very cut-throat industry in hardware.
So Apple is happy with billions sitting around in cash, making machines for people that are willing to pay a premium.
(Disclaimer: I own three Macs and one clone)
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
The lack of clones isn't a problem, only a symptom of the problem. The problem is that Apple has no interest in competition, because their business model is totally dependent on their margins (which outstrip those of the rest of the industry by a huge margin). Clones are a symptom of this; because the existence of clones would force Apple to price more competitively, they muscle any cloner out.
Now, of course, these motherboards by TerraSoft couldn't considered "clones" by any reasonable person; after all, they don't run any OS that Apple's ever written (well, they might run MkLinux, but I think it's safe to say that Apple doesn't much care about that one anymore). But Apple doesn't see it that way. To them, anyone using even the same chip is a threat to their precious margins.
I only said that Apple would treat Terra the same as they would any clonemaker. They see Terra as a threat, because they make PowerPC boxes, which Apple sees as its market.
Is this right? Hell no. The management at Apple has always been populated entirely by insane fools, and probably always will be. However, they're the ones running the place, and if they think of Terra as a threat, then they'll treat it like one.
A SWIM chip is a floppy controller, which is hardly crucial to running MacOS X.
-fred
Sign #11 of Slashdot overdose: You see the phrase 'moderate Republican' and you wonder if that would be a +1 or a -1.
This story has nothing to do with Apple
A company who was making server boards which happened to be using G3 PPC chips decided that they could not get the ! for $ they need to compete with cheaper architectures. Since your very limited knowledge of PPC leads you to think this is something Apple is trying to keep Apple-only, you immediately made the dumbass assumption that big, bad Apple must have sent their lawyers after them or something.
PPC was designed specifically with the intention that it be used by a lot of different companies and on a lot of different boards. IBM's Power4 servers are built with PPC boards, for example. The low power requirements (and therefore, low heat) of the PPC also makes it popular for embedded chip applications.
It's not the PPC chip that makes a Mac board a Mac board, it's the boot ROM chips. Theoretically, since the Mac OS X runs on the Mach microkernel, it would be relatively trivial adapt it to run it on an Intel-based motherboard... if you had the required Apple ROM chips also on that board. Running OS X on any platform without Apple's proprietary chips is not.
You might not have intended to troll, but what a huge thread you launched of people who are rightly pointing out that your post is completely wrong, misinformed, and so wild of a conspiracy that some are probably now wondering if you were wearing a tinfoil hat as you wrote it. Every single moderator who called any of your posts in this thread "Insightful" clearly did not read the article before moderating. I stongly urge them to post something in this thread in order to cancel their moderation.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
It's not an Apple competitor;
Apple didn't make them say this;
It would not enable Apple clones...
Did I miss something or is it a black helicopter day?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
They were in a catch-22. The systems needed to come down in price to gain wide spread acceptance, and they needed wide spread acceptance to come down in price. The competition is so stiff for servers and clusters that it was hard to compete. It is indeed sad.
Ah, finally somebody who understands that there might be other reasons for wanting a PPC computer than to build a cheap Apple clone.
Personally I liked the idea of building a Linux system that used a low power but powerful and advanced chip like the PPC. Why run an ultra cool and advanced OS like Linux on a throwback chip like the x86 and its derivitives. Maybe a cheap firewall/router box that ran (or could run) a full version of Linux with Flash storage (8MB would be plenty for a default config, then allow Flash card upgrades and/or external USB drives) USB could connect to external storage and printers, etc. Not fast enough to replace your home computer, just fast enough to be useful while drawing under 20W of power.
Honestly, Macs are cheap enough these days that If I want to run OS X I can buy a real Mac rather than deal with the headaches of a hacked up system.
Come on, an iBook is only $999 new. And used G4 cubes are real tempting as well (Well, not at the $700+ their going for on eBay! Damn, talk about resale value)
You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
It's true that the clones nearly killed Apple. But this wasn't because of some problem inherent in cloning, it was because Apple refused to compete with the cloners.
Don't forget that the clones nearly killed IBM as well. Yes, there is some inherent problem in cloning - the inventor gets no reward for his invention. IBM had hoped to control the PC market by controlling BIOS. As we all know, they hopes were vain and as a result, IBM came to near-death situation in late 80's. Yes, PC-boxes are almost everywhere now, but each single one of them has still many remainders of the early 80's technology - the 1.44 floppy, the beeper, some even still have ISA slots. "Legacy-free PC" is still a goal, not something you can actually buy and use. As a Mac user, I don't want Apple to evolve this way. I'm glad the clone market was killed in 1997.
Mac OS X is not Linux, instead it's actually a BSD. It uses a Mach microkernel with a FreeBSD derived personality to give it its UNIX feel. It uses NetBSD's, FreeBSD's, and OpenBSD's userland components and libraries to provide a UNIX userland environment. It has nothing to do with Linux, except for a few LGPL libraries and GCC as its compiler.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
Pekka Nissinen had recently updated his AmigaOne (and Pegasos) benchmarks comparison webpage, providing information on various benchmark performance tests for AmigaOne-SE and AmigaOne-XE motherboards.
Do note however that the G4 benchmarks do not include any Altivec optimised software tests, in which case the overall performance can be significantly improved, depending on the software type used and degree of optimisation.
You've been out of the loop for quite some time it seems. :) :)
/$ 800, without any OS but a CD-R with Debian. TSS' announced price for the same board, including the retail version of YDL, was /$ 500.
.sig.
The Teron is an "AmigaOne". The "AmigaOne" is a Teron. "AmigaOne" is one distributor's chosen trademark for the Teron boards. A Teron is not "the primary competitor" to a Teron.
FYI, Eyetech's price for a Teron PX (a.k.a. "AmigaOne XE") is
The original "AmigaOne", that was going to connect to a real Amiga, was to be made for Eyetech by Escena, but that project failed something like three years ago! Plans for a new Amiga were scrapped, and instead AmigaOS 4+ will run on generic hardware like these Terons. But only when they're separated from the rest of the third party hardware market and sold dongled and bundled with AmigaOS via an "Amiga hardware" monopoly.
Of course AmigaOS could run on your PowerBook. Macs, especially those without the juice to run MacOS X at a useful speed, would be an obvious hardware platform to target. Common/business sense is unfortunately not allowed to rule in this case though. Have a look at the URL in my
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
"We have clearly learned a powerful lesson and do extend our apology to you..."
Yeah they realized that Macs and PPCs are slow...
Not only is there interest in a Mac clone, these guys are in the process of getting systems together to ship.
According to a recent message by John Fraser (co-creator of the iBox) on the Think Secret message board, these systems will made available for pre-order in about 2 weeks.
8==8 Bones 8==8
the Present.
Soooooo Awesome.
Kind of a strange company... They seem to be having a bit of a rocky beginning, but their products are enticing. Hardware support is a little lacking, but most of the important stuff is supported.
You probably haven't USED a PPC/Linux box. They make great servers. Here are my reasons:
The G3 and G4 have caches comparable to most Xeon chips, making them a happy medium between consumer CPUs and expensive server CPUs. An Apple blue+white G3 with a SCSI card is blazing-fast for most server purposes, much faster IMO than a comparably clocked PC.
The G3 uses very little power and does not need a fan on its small heatsink, making it ideal for 24/7 uptime. High power-use not only costs money directly, but it costs money to cool off server rooms and offices. Less moving parts (fans) means less downtime too (for both cleaning and repair)
OpenFirmware lets you have quite a bit of control over how your machine boots, your machine doesn't need to bootstrap into protected mode, it's native 32-bit from the ground-up. If there's no monitor connected I can pump my POST screen ove rthe serial port, that's GREAT for network management.
Great compiler support from the GCC team. There's targets for the enire line of PowerPC products.
Straightforward architecture. I'm not a programmer, but it seems to me that x86 has a lot of hacked and bastardized components added to it to make it both fast and backwards-compatable. PowerPC is fast and backward compatable from the get-go, true RISC means that there's very little change in the inner workings of the CPU, there's not a new set of instructions for the compilers and developers to catch up to every year.
PowerPC has it's roots in large high-quality systems (RS/6000 servers). x86 has it's roots in the lowest-end computers of it's day (it was designed for the PC, which is the bottom of the line for computer vendors).
You can FEEL when you're running on a better architecture. The system doesn't ever feel 'laggy' even when it gets bogged down, performance is much better than a similar spec'ed PC, and the cabinet the case is in stays cool all the time.
I use an Athlon for my workstation because it's cheap and fun to hack around with, but my servers are PowerPC and I've never even thought of moving them to x86.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
(including the first safely hot-swappable Ethernet and VGA connectors)
Man, that's amazing! I've been trying to hotswap my RJ-45 cable and my D-SUB 15 VGA cable for months, but the damned things just won't fit! I did solder some wires once from the VGA-out port straight into my network hub, but I just blew up the hub. I'd be so grateful if you could forward some schematics or something of this Ethernet/VGA hotswap device.