Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

DIY Laptop

Posted by Hemos on from the from-the-ground-up dept.

Brietech writes "Ever felt like building your own laptop from (almost literally) scratch? This is a microcontroller-based "laptop" built from the ground up from a handful of chips and other hardware found lying around. It runs a self-hosted development environment, allowing the user to write and edit programs in "Chris++" on the machine, and then compile and run them. The carpentry looks like it could use some work, but it's a neat project!"

14 of 178 comments (clear)

  1. right.... by mastershake_phd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes I would like to be able to build a laptop like I build a desktop. A rickedy wooden box with a 20x4 blue & white, backlit LCD is not a laptop. Well I guess you could put it on your lap, but you know what I mean.

    --
    Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
    1. Re:right.... by PresidentEnder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When we all talk about "building" desktops from parts off newegg I'm a little bit reminded of "writing" games by hacking a few lines into some TAs code in an indroductory CS class. While a great many slashdotters understand what their computer is doing, this sort of thing indicates a much deeper understanding than "I need a motherboard, a processor, some RAM, and a videocard."

      --
      I used to carry a bottle of whiskey for snake bite. And two snakes. -Nefarious Wheel
    2. Re:right.... by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, then this article isn't for you.

      Personally, I think anyone doing something different and practical like this is fairly interesting however useful (or desirable to ME) the end result might be.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:right.... by CasperIV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "this sort of thing indicates a much deeper understanding" Or it indicates way too much free time.

  2. hahah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    How come any old DIY PoS gets posted here.. What's next? DIY Mainframe machine build in an old refrigerator box loaded to the tits with 8086's and some VFD?

    How about some real project postings, not some crappy pic chip with a serial eeprom and hitachi display.. 4 months? I've seen 8 graders hack that together in 4 hours.

    Choose a program from [0-9]?
    1. THIS TEH SUCK
    2. THIS TEH SUCK
    3. THIS TEH SUCK ..etc.

  3. I thought it was rather good. by Dimentox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While it may be nothing based on modern laptops, and the title is a bit misleading, i thought it was rather interesting. What was interesting is that he took a proc chip, wrote his own os and compiler. It really was a DIY project. I dont think it needed that big of a box but otherwise it was an interesting find. I would be intrested in if we could really do laptops like we do Desktops, perhaps there is a site out there that has the parts. but over and all this was a interesting find.

    --
    string sig = llGetSig("dimentox"); llSay(0,sig);
    1. Re:I thought it was rather good. by qwijibo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I can appreciate the value of doing something yourself, this seems totally useless. I figure I can find HP48's for $20 if I try hard enough and those are infinitely more practical, portable, and useful. Reinventing the wheel for the sake of being the millionth guy to do it as a cube seems kinda silly.

  4. I had a dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm a pretty old guy so I'm kind of fed up of waiting for the so-called ubiquitous computing era. I find that modern electronics has piss-poor interoperability, usually by being intentionally crippled. Why can't I use my camera's SD as a USB drive? It's not a camera, it's a computer with a lens. Why can't I get a true handheld computer that can act as a USB host so I can control my camera? Because the stupid application only exists on Win2K and up, not for mobile Windows, and the handheld can't act as a host anyways. Why not? It's just software. Oh but there's USB-on-the-go, a poorly documented USB mode that requires a special cable, but the connectors look the same.

    So why can't there be an industry standard of handheld electronics building blocks? Instead of an iPod, how about an IMod? A cpu block that you can tack on a battery, lens, HD or CF, and headphone amp. Then you create the driving application in some sort of 90's AmigaVision drag-and-drop metaphor.

    Why is it in 2007 there still is such a thing as a seperate cell phone, walkman, camera, and you need a 14 year-old with a PhD to try to get a file from one device to the other?

    1. Re:I had a dream by wolff000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Money friend it all comes down to money. If things were as inter operable as you described we wouldn't need to buy as many gadgets as we do. The manufacturers aren't going to make things easy for us not in the sense you are talking about. To do that they would lose profit and heaven forbid they don't make their billions. I do feel your pain I am waiting for that day myself. I think by the time it comes I'll be a wrinkled old man and I'm only in my late twenties.

      --
      WTF?
    2. Re:I had a dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      > Money friend it all comes down to money. As tempting as the evil corporate conspiracy theories are, I'll give you two reasons why they're wrong and why they are going to change in the near future.
      1. Have you ever used a cell phone PDA? While useful for geeks, the unwashed masses are nowhere near tech savvy enough to use those interfaces. Tack on more functions and you need more buttons, more buttons = more confusion. That's why the iPhone is so potentially revolutionary. It doesn't really DO anything revolutionary it just does a lot of things with an interface that's easy to use. And it's not about Apple, it's about touch screens and "soft" keys coming down in price and making multifunctional devices useable for the first time.

      2. If it's all about the money, then there would be (probably is) an arms race by device manufacturers to be the first one to make such a device because if they can replace the consumers need to buy all their competitors products in favor of their own they will be, in effect, printing their own money. Apple has started the ball rolling (although origami was probably the first serious attempt that failed) but I can't imagine that everyone else will be very far behind.
    3. Re:I had a dream by wolff000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are right that Apple's iPhone is getting closer but even with all the fancy stuff it has it is no where near as inter operable as the parent post described. I can't wait to get one myself they just look too cool and the display and touchscreen is kinda mind blowing. They however won't connect to any device other than a PC or Mac and then only with the right software. You can't just dump data on them like they are a flash drive or use them to dump pictures on from a camera or similar device.

      I don't think any of the gadget makers have any interest in a true all in one device. They would make tons of money at first but what happens when most people have a great all in one device? Sales will fall and a new model won't help too much since the last one already did everything and well. Let's say Sony makes the super PDA/Phone/Video-Still Camera/Storage device. Since Sony already makes things in most of these categories they are severally limiting themselves in what you would normally spend. They could really only charge around $200-$300 to make the device feasible for most people and that price still alienates a large part of consumers just in the US. Considering most people would normally spend that on just a camera you can see how much money they lose on a true universal gadget. I stand by the the reasoning that we don't have truly universal gadgets is because of the almighty dollar. This is of course my humble opinion and I admit that some company might have such a device in the works. I just hope it's not Sony I would prefer my dream gadget not burst into flames.

      --
      WTF?
  5. Cut him some slack already... by TigerNut · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Your laptop with its "modern" $(OS) spends about 99% of its CPU cycles supporting itself. What we're seeing here could be viewed as an attempt to improve the cycles-for-the-user ratio, if nothing else. If just I want to add a couple of numbers together or edit a document, do I need, or should I have to pay for, the ability to simultaneously have an MPEG movie playing in the background?

    Stripping a computer back to its bare essentials is an art. Real hot rods don't have air conditioning. Real computers don't need 3GHz CPUs, 2GB of RAM, and a 500 watt power supply to present an interactive user interface.

    --

    Less is more.

  6. Neat by wolff000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It may not win in looks, or processing power, or graphics, or any thing for that matter but it was a neat project. They guy spent some real time piecing things together with chips instead of just using a mini itx board. The fact he made his own language to program it is a definite plus. It isn't something I would make myself but a nice DIY project none the less. I don't quite get what all the complaints are about even if it is a glorified calculator he built it himself. When was the last time any of you built something starting with just a handful of chips?

    --
    WTF?
  7. Re:Oh please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Then do it and post it on Slashdot. Otherwise, STFU.