Pico-ITX, Because Size Matters

An anonymous reader writes "It's not every day that a new form factor comes out, especially not one that is 10cm x 7.2cm. Despite its size, Pico-ITX is the hottest new thing in the rapidly changing small form factor market. It is considerably smaller than Mini-ITX (17cm x 17cm) which has proven itself to be quite versatile and though some sacrifices had to be made to shrink the platform, Pico-ITX is surprisingly complete. The system was tested with Feather Linux but the PX10000 has the power to run Windows XP or Ubuntu if you want to add on a hard drive."

Comments

Units

[6Yankee]

From TFA: A full-sized ATX motherboard is 12 x 9.6 (305mm x 244mm) and Mini-ITX is 17cm x 17xcm

That's nice and clear, don't you think?

Re:Units

[Bobartig]

This should, under all circumstances, be unnecessary to say:

When you publish information, you should endeavor to make it understandable and digestible. Thus, when demonstrating a relationship by using units of measure, it behooves you to use the same units for both quantities. We can all convert inches to mm, or cm to mm, or rod perch to furlongs if we really have to (ok, google will do that last one). The point is, we shouldn't have to, because the article writer should be humane and considerate.

Pretty small, but...

[Bombula]

I'm no expert and I know this thing is tiny, but aren't laptop motherboards already pretty small? The motherboards in some of those tiny Sony Vaios must not be much bigger than this thing, and thinner too - and they've been around for a few years now.

Re:pirce & why not fanless?

[Alioth]

The PC platform is quite awful for embedded stuff, power hungry and demanding (requires a big operating system) - it's unlikely to find its way into embedded platforms (except where the developer has a severe lack of imagination, or the production run is so small they have to use people with commodity skills to develop the code rather than those who know embedded systems). It's more likely to be used in small form factor PCs.

drop the legacy ports; minimal IO configuration

[johnrpenner]

| Despite the size, the specifications make it clear that the ITX motherboard
| has a full range of connections, including DVI, VGA, ethernet, four USB ports,
| two PS/2 connections and more.

we do not want a 'full range' of connectors -- because anything that wastes circuitry
for PS2 connections on a pico size board is a dodo (imo).

we DO NOT WANT: IDE, PS/2 or VGA connectors cluttering up our motherboard.
they duplicate functions already better achieved with: SATA, USB, and DVI.
we want as few ports as possible and still be able to achieve any function.
so, what ARE the desireable ports?

-USB 2.0 (four ports)
- SATA (two ports)
- DVI (with optional VGA header)
- SODIMM Slot for RAM (two)
- ethernet (10/100/1000)
- optional 802.11g/n

that's it -- no extra ones besides that.
get the bios working so it can boot with those,
and drop the legacy cruft.

j

'Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler' (Einstein)

Re:drop the legacy ports; minimal IO configuration

[screeble]

No serial ports?

They say a lot of things but that's the stupidest thing I've heard all week. Connectivity of the "most common denominator" is lost with your collective desires, "We." IDE, PS/2 and VGA connectors are not legacy ports. They are standards that should be maintained because SATA, USB, and DVI do not duplicate and/or replace the functionality of the ports you wish to remove.

Yesterday I used a null modem and minicom to connect two systems via ttyS0. One of the boxes faces the internet and I don't want it to have IP-based login capabilities so that there is no risk of toll fraud. On many of my other servers I use PS/2 and VGA connectors with IP KVM's all the time for cheap OOB management.

I would not purchase a mobo w/o those connectors. They're a standard and NOT cruft. I'm looking at this from a server perspective though.

Poor cable management

[Animats]

A basic problem with this thing is that they just bring out the connections to header connectors. So you have all the internal mess of a regular PC, crammed into less space.

It would be more useful in the PC market to have a board with roughly the same footprint as a CD or DVD drive, with all the external connectors on the back edge of the board. Get rid of all those internal jumper cables. If the thing is going to go in a box with a CD or DVD drive, there's not much point in making it smaller than the drive. I realize this is more or less an Intel Mac Mini. At that density, you have to have integrated design of board, packaging, and airflow.

The Mac IIci, over a decade ago, was the first machine to get this right. No internal cables. Even the power supply clicked into the motherboard. The machine was designed for automated assembly, instead of low-wage assembly.