$250 Freescale-Based "Green" "Cloud" Computer

An anonymous reader sends word of the CherryPal, a tiny desktop computer that its maker says will consume just 2 watts. It uses a Freescale processor that runs Linux and has no moving parts. The CherryPal has integrated software and an embedded Linux (based on Debian) that has been stripped down to support Open Office, Firefox, iTunes, instant messaging, and multimedia access locally. More applications are available in the cloud, and 50 GB of cloud storage is included. It comes without keyboard or mouse but with ports for VGA, USB, Ethernet, and built-in Wi-Fi. It's claimed that the CherryPal will boot up in 20 seconds from 4 GB of flash. They've buried Linux so that the end user doesn't see it; the entire UI is presented through Firefox. The CherryPal site says: "There's no software or upgrades to install, no risk of viruses, and no operating system to deal with and free 24/7 support."

Comments

"green" vs "no upgrades"

[thrillseeker]

so buying a throw-away brick is now considered green?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[4D6963]

so buying a throw-away brick is now considered green?

Yeah, because the parts you replace when upgrading are notoriously biodegradable!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[TheRealMindChild]

And why exactly would you throw it away?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[ePhil_One]

And why exactly would you throw it away?

Its just a matter of time until the release the CherryPal2...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bishop Rook]

I'd imagine most of the "upgrades" to your computer-using experience are going to be on the server-side, since the computer itself is basically a thin client.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[pschmied]

I've never thrown a PC away. I've been upgrading my trusty Radio Shack TRS-80 CoCo2 all this time. . . component by component. I've even kept the circuit boards.

Seriously, the ecologically worst parts of the computer are the circuit boards and the LCDs if I recall correctly. I don't see how swapping a big-ass motherboard in and out of your relatively benign metal case is that green.

This, on the other hand, is small and does consume very little power. I bet its footprint isn't much bigger than the average video card. If you want to be green it probably means not buying a computer, or making due with old / slow shit.

Reduce, reuse, recycle. IN THAT ORDER! How many geeks here follow the first and most ecologically beneficial part of that triad?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[cosinezero]

Better to throw away a piece than the entire puzzle.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[OrangeTide]

That analogy means the opposite what you think it does. You really might as well throw away the whole puzzle if you already are missing a piece.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Better to throw away a piece than the entire pie.

Happy?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd imagine most of the "upgrades" to your computer-using experience are going to be on the server-side, since the computer itself is basically a thin client.

You must be new to capitalism...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[thrillseeker]

so ordering the replacement scrabble letter is not as "good" as buying a whole new game sourced from additional dead trees - box, board, complete set of letters and all?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[sm62704]

I didn't go quite that far back... well, maybe I did. My third computer was an IBM XT I bought used in 1987. It was the last whole computer I bought. At one time my "IBM XT" sported a forty meg hard drive, 386 processor, joystick, mouse, and SVGA graphics. Alas, the next upgrade replaced the last remaining origional parts, the case and power supply, as the new motherboard wouldn't fit in the XT case.

I put back together with its original parts, but its monochrome hercules card had died. I left it in the house the bank foreclosed on in 2005, along with a bunch of other computers, all built with spare parts.

I met a rich man once, who told the that the secret to wealth was to never throw anything away! When the great depression hit he'd bought a Model T Ford from a friend as a favor to the friend, who needed fifteen bucks to buy mules and a wagon to move to California. He had no use for it and stored it in his barn.

In 1951 a collector spied it and bought it from the old guy for $100,000. He invested the $100k and will never want for anything again.

I met this gentleman long before the bank took the house, but I had been overcome by insanity; I'd not gotten over my divorce, they were taking my house away, the doctor took me off Paxil and the only thing that kept me from killing myself was knowing what it would do to my children.

As lomg as you never throw its parts away, all computers are green; at least, as green as they ever were. So maybe this "green" computer isn't so green after all; at least, not in the hands of a nerd like me.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

"all computers are green; at least, as green as they ever were."

Reminds me of the recent articles about how 'green' the new hybrids really are. Turns out, it's greener to buy a used car, even if it's a guzzler.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Arccot]

And why exactly would you throw it away?

Its just a matter of time until the release the CherryPal2...

I'm really, really hoping the next version is the Cherry 2000 instead. I'd buy one of those.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[zappepcs]

Damn dude, I was going to offer you a Hercules card for free... sorry about the house!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Anonymous Coward]

You really might as well throw away the whole puzzle if you already are missing a piece.

Not when they sell the pieces individually.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[drinkypoo]

Relatively benign? Steel is terrible. Seriously. Everything about its production is bad. Personally I like to buy a lot of recycled stuff, but that doesn't work when you want something small and fast.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Jamil Karim]

the secret to wealth was to never throw anything away!

So, um... where do I store all my used Kleenexes, Q-tips, fingernail clippings, banana peels, etc....

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bishop Rook]

You must be new to subscription-based services. Charging $5 a month in perpetuity for subscription access to a software tool that lives server-side is a lot more money than charging $50 one-shot for software that you install on your own hard drive. It's especially a lot more money than the $0 they'd get when (not if) you pirate it.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MooUK]

Not everyone has the space or money to run multiple computers. There's no point replacing the entire machine when replacing one part will do. Yes, maybe replacing the case has a negligible cost compared to the rest - but nevertheless there's no point replacing it if you don't need to! Likewise, why buy a new optical drive, or network card, or PSU, if the existing ones are fine?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[HTH NE1]

Its just a matter of time until the release the CherryPal2...

Such as the first viral exploit?

"The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." -- Douglas Adams

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Stanistani]

So it's true... Howard Hughes is alive!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Belial6]

Sweet!!! I hadn't thought of Cherry 2000 in years!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Belial6]

Someone else will have to run the numbers, but I would guess that buying a shiny new PC that runs off of 2 watts is probably a net gain for the environment than continuing to run that old slow P4 for the next 15 years.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Eric Smith]

And why exactly would you throw it away?

Why did you throw away your old 286-based PC? It still can run the same spreadsheet and word processor it ran back in 1986 just fine.

With rare exceptions, everything you own is going to be thrown away eventually.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Al Dimond]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but I disagree with your last paragraph. It all gets thrown away eventually, by you or whoever is responsible after you die (the odds that any given possession, even a large one, is going to become a collectors' item is small enough to be insignificant). Whether it goes to a tech recycling company that presumably can reclaim some materials, whether it goes to a landfill where the materials are wasted and any toxic chemicals are presumably competently contained, or whether it's dumped in the woods where the nasty stuff (in the case of old circuit boards, lead is the thing that comes to mind for me, though I'm no expert) just seeps into the soil, if it one day was built it will be thrown away some other day.

So the questions with regards to how "green" a computer is are how it was made and of what, how cleanly and efficiently it operates, and how it's disposed of. If energy savings of this computer over an existing computer are greater than the manufacture and disposal costs of *this* computer (as the old computer has already been built and will be thrown away, and although this is also true of the new one, buying a new computer creates demand that will cause more of that type to be built), buying this computer as opposed to keeping an old one (or buying used) is "greener".

This equation is complicated because the costs are largely in toxic pollution and dumping and the savings are in energy; there's no obvious conversion rate (energy generation, depending on source, probably has pollution both on-site and at mining/drilling sites, probably affects ecosystems in ways other than just pollution/toxicity, and probably draws down a non-renewable resource), and in fact it varies situationally (a scenario with abundant clean energy but already-dangerous levels of environmental toxicity would favor different choices than a scenario with less pollution and no clean energy source). It's further complicated in this case by this computer's dependence on external services. Presumably it will cause additional energy use at some data center compared to some other computer, and then you have to factor in the energy situation in that data center's location and the costs of additional Internet traffic.

If you want to never throw anything away, never buy anything.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[OrangeTide]

you act like scrabble is a puzzle. perhaps you should read the rulebook?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[ePhil_One]

And $5 a month plus $250 every year or two to support the "latest software" that "You're already paying for" is even more.

You're arguing against a point nobody made...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[GrumpySteen]

In 1951 a collector spied it and bought it from the old guy for $100,000. He invested the $100k and will never want for anything again.

Obviously he didn't invest that $100k in Enron

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Anonymous Coward]

Who does that? It's hard to buy individual puzzle pieces unless they are individually numbered. Plus a puzzle costs like $5, it would probably cost nearly that much to order a replacement (and risk getting the wrong thing).

Better to just recycle the material into something else.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[griffjon]

Oblig.

Imagine a beowulf cluster of these -- as the bricks of your house!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[KillerBob]

why on earth would you need 36GB of storage on a firewall?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MonsterTrimble]

I agree with you, to a point. Never throw away something that is reusable - Still running/servicable computers. radios, shelves, bikes, etc. I myself have something like six towers and five bikes which are either in service or able to put into service with very little work. If something it toally trashed or is not usable for it's intended purpose toss it.

My in-laws (and to a large extent my wife) are all packrats and proud of it. When I see their upstairs office crammed with books from 30 years ago that haven't moved since they put them there I want to go thru it myself and remove the clutter. I love them all to death but it's a pet peeve.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bishop Rook]

And $5 a month plus $250 every year or two to support the "latest software" that "You're already paying for" is even more.

The company claims that their system will last ten years, and I was going on the (probably generous) assumption that that's an honest claim. It is at least plausible, since the system is designed to be little more than a thin client for server-side applications, which (depending on the app) offloads a lot of the computation work onto the server. Hell, if all you're running is Firefox and all you have to do is make sure AJAX applications are relatively snappy, you don't need particularly hefty hardware.

In this case, the business model will probably be based on cheap and durable hardware (as promised) but a costly subscription model. But IANABusinessAnalyst.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Jamil Karim]

Sadly, no. Although I am fascinated by the different ways he discovered to dodge taxes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes#Managing_the_financial_empire

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[fm6]

No, using less power is considered green. If this machine really uses 2 watts (yeah, I'm skeptical too), then it's saving about 100 watts. Assume that the computer is turned on about 40 hours a week, then it uses 4 kilowatt hours a week.

A little random googling and I came up with it taking a ton of coal to produce 2,460 kilowatt hours of electricity. So if 615 people using a 4-watt computer instead of a 100+ watt computer save a ton of coal a week. Not exactly a major impact, but not trivial either.

(Cue the green-bashing snipers with their "stupid environmentalist cliches". Sorry, not interested.)

Anyway, how does lack of upgradability make a computer a "throwaway brick"? If a computer does what you need it to, why do you need to upgrade it? Most users, especially business users, never install a PCI card. If you buy a computer that already has enough RAM (most are sold undersupplied, to keep the list price down) and a big enough disk (except this thing doesn't need a disk), you probably won't upgrade. Unless you need a fancy video adapter to play Halo. And if you do, you won't buy this kind of computer in the first place.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[commodoresloat]

I've been upgrading my trusty Radio Shack TRS-80 CoCo2 all this time. . .

I think when they said "green" they meant ecologically sound; it wasn't supposed to be a description of the color of the text on the screen.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[sm62704]

Especially if you live somewhere where the electricity comes from natural gas or (like here) coal.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[sm62704]

Obviously he didn't invest that $100k in Enron

This was some time in the early 1980s, Enron didn't exixt. However, if you had bought Enron early and fled before it crumbled you would have made a killing. That's the way of riches; you have to have it to get it. The insiders got rich while California had brownouts and small investors and employees lost everything.

If you want to be scared shitless, read Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the 1920s by Frederick Lewis Allen. It was required reading in a required undergrad history class I took in the late 1970s, the University of Virginia has placed the entire text online (darn, back in the old days we had to BUY books!)

The 1920s had many eerie similarities to now, especially finance. Their ultra-rich were as sociopathis as today's. We mey be heading for another depression.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[kesuki]

yes, steel is terrible, but at least point out what's wrong with it.

Taconite is the primary source of iron ore, that is used to make steel, the debris remains of taconite are highly toxic, and there were companies dumping taconite debris in the great lakes, all the way into the early 90's now in the US it all has to be stored on land, but it's Toxic, and leaches into water! i guess nobody cares what happens in northern Minnesota though, so who cares if making iron released tons of toxic waste.

secondly, steel can only be produces with a very hot flame, coal needs to be modified to even achieve such a hot temperature, and a load of ozone is produced by steel production, ozone is good though right? not in the lower atmosphere, it makes allergy sufferers suffer worse allergies, and there are days when in steel country they issue advisories 'not to go outside' due to the high ozone levels, usually a stagnant pressure system that keeps the ozone locked in one place for several days is the cause for such 'advisories.'

oh and remember how i mentioned iron production creates tons of pollution? Guess what! Steel does too! http://www.sprol.com/?p=373 and US steel was caught doing it in 2005, dumping toxic slag into waterways.

Aluminum also produces toxic waste, but compared to steel, it's trivial for one thing most soil world wide already has a small percentage (around 1%) of aluminum oxides already...

although the carbon factor with aluminum is greater than with steel, it's also one of the better recycled metals. steel and iron sadly, do not get recycled nearly enough.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[spud603]

???
What do electric utilities have to do with hybrid cars? All of the electricity in a hybrid comes from a gasoline generator (ie 'engine'). Unless I'm missing something?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[coresnake]

Just like warm apple pie...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[TheRealMindChild]

Why did you throw away your old 286-based PC?

You don't know me very well. I didn't.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[ArsonSmith]

I'm holding out for the Cherry2000.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[hammerwing]

Umm, how do you get 2 watts for 40 hours to be equal to 4 kilowatt hours? I may not be the worlds greatest mathematician, but isn't 2 watts for 40 hours 80 watt-hours? Now 80 watt-hours per week is equal to 4160 watt-hours per year or roughly 4 kilowatt hours, so maybe that's where you were going?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[FreeRadicalX]

I'm so lost. At what point did this discussion switch from analogy to literal meaning?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[fm6]

You're right, I dropped a decimal point. So it takes 10 weeks to save that ton of coal, not 1 week. Still a significant savings.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[rueger]

Yeah, because the parts you replace when upgrading are notoriously biodegradable!

Well, technically everything is biodegradeable if you wait long enough.... lead... computers... dioxin... granite.... barbie dolls...

It may not be quick, and may not degrade into something you like, but it will degrade...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[74nova]

what about reducing power costs? I'm genuinely asking the question. Maybe not the one you're talking about, but I'm guessing that, for instance, it's overall better to throw away the old P2-166 and replace it with an appliance router simply for power reasons.

Is that reducing? I don't really know, just a thought

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Heather D]

Unless you need a fancy video adapter to play Halo. And if you do, you won't buy this kind of computer in the first place.

That's the reason. Probably 90% of the computers out there that are faster than 1GHz are there because, at some point, someone discovered that that new game they were interested in would not run on their old box.

The popularity of UMPCs tells us there's likely a significant market for something like this but UMPCs aren't very suitable for games either. Neither will replace the old 'beige box' anytime soon.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MichaelSmith]

But on the other hand, you can keep using steel pretty much forever. My old steel bike frames will outlive me. I can't say that for my aluminum ones.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mrsteveman1]

No, i want the entire pie and will picket your house until you produce the missing piece.

I can wait all day folks....

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[fm6]

Minimal computers with limited expandability have already replaced beige boxes on many desktops and in many homes. I don't know the numbers, but it wouldn't surprise me if it were approaching a majority of sales. Corporate buyers just don't need all those expansion slots — if the computer isn't powerful enough, they'll just buy a more powerful computer. Home users mostly take a similar attitude. Only hardware geeks worry about expandibility.

And 1 Ghz computers haven't taken over because people want them. They've taken over because that's all you can buy.

I have a sister who bought an eMachine a long time ago with a half-dozen PCI slots. Never used more than one. It came with a modem pre-installed in one slot. A couple years ago, I replaced the modem with an ethernet card so she could use DSL. But the machine was slowly dying, so I found her an off-lease Dell on eBay.

No need for an ethernet card, there's a port on the motherboard, which also has a 64MB onboard VGA adapter. That's enough to run some pretty powerful graphics. So there's no need for expansion. And that's a good thing, because this beast has zero PCI slots.

That's a green thing too, because powering PCI slots means a big, internal power supply. This thing doesn't have one, there's just one of those black, passively cooled wall warts. There's an internal fan, but with no power supply to cool, it doesn't make much noise. Which is actually why I got this particular model — she has a thing about noise.

My sister's absolutely besotted with this machine, because it's drastically more powerful than anything she's owned before. (Even though it's a used, low-end machine!) She'll probably have it for years. Is this a "disposable brick"? She wouldn't agree.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

Hey, I don't like how you tell me what I do or don't do!

I'd never pay a subscription fee for software! :)

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[ediron2]

Or the ApPal II. With that soothing 'SoSuMi' sound that plays on startup.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

What happens to the aluminium frames?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

It came from their average desktop using 114 watt, and this one using 2 watt. 114-2=112 watt difference.

112 watts * 40 hours / week = 4.48 kwh / week in energy savings.

2460/4.48 = 549 people using this one instead for a week = 1 ton of coal saved.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Daengbo]

But would you pay a monthly fee for service?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[phaggood]

> 10 weeks to save a ton of coal
No, it's still 10 wks. Unless the box is directly wired to your cerebral cortex, you're going to need a monitor that probably uses a touch more than 2 watts - the eeePC UMPC uses 14W so to be greener you better attach a 12W screen to your Cherry box.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[DeadDecoy]

I'm pretty sure that with hybrids, you recharge the car by plugging it into a compatible wall socket somewhere. The nice thing about that is you might be able to consolidate the inefficiencies at one sight (a power plant) instead of across thousands to millions of individual vehicles.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[spud603]

I'm pretty sure you're wrong. I know several people with hybrids. They have a gasoline engine and one or more electric motors/generators. They selectively use the electric or gas motors based on conditions, and use the gas motor and energy from braking to charge the batteries.
It looks like there are some plug-in hybrids, but those are the exception.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[couchslug]

"In 1951 a collector spied it and bought it from the old guy for $100,000. He invested the $100k and will never want for anything again."

BWAHAHAHA!
I grew up working on such old Fords (thanks to mentors who were highly experienced gearheads beginning the Fifties, we sold cars and parts at Hershey and Carlisle) and no imaginable mint Model "T" would have pulled that sort of money back then.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[fm6]

You're going to need a monitor in any case. We're calculating how much you can save, not how much you're using.

Which means that my original calculation (1 week, one ton of coal) was correct.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[apoc.famine]

I realized that more than three quarters of my evening computer use was surfing and IM. And I run a pretty beastly desktop for modern FPS games. After using a modest tax refund for an EEE-PC, I've seen a $5-$10 reduction in my electricity bill every month. And I can drag it around with me, since I can carry it between two fingers.

Will I ever upgrade this? Well, maybe - when surfing the web and IM needs more horsepower than this has currently. I'm guessing that is never, which conveniently is when I'm planning to upgrade this. Parts will fail before then.

All in all, it's pretty green. I estimate that I'll get a solid 6 years of surfing out of it, based on previous part lifetimes. If that's that case, that's 6 years of not running 500 watt (for the first two years, 1kW the next two, 2kW the next two) power supplies just to surf.

P.S. - It bounces off carpet, from three feet up. At least, the first three times. That I'm sure of.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bonobo_Unknown]

Biodegradable implies biological action in the degradation process. So yes, everything degrades over time, but no, not everything is biodegradable.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MrNaz]

Around 1997 is when Slashdot started, I believe.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Chrontius]

The price was right. And I quote: "I rescued it from a dumpster five years ago." That's right, dumpterware. Part of the whole "Reduce, reuse, recycle" thing.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[kesuki]

i wondered that too, i have an aluminum frame bike i've had it for 4 years now, nothing has gone wrong with it... and my dad has a steel frame bike from the 60's or 70's that has rust on it, it's still fine but...

i know aluminum can corrode too, and in aircraft it can suffer metal fatigue, but you'd have to be awfully heavy to cause metal fatigue to an aluminum frame..

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MichaelSmith]

Aluminum is more brittle than steel. I know a few people who have broken them. Bike frames are generally made as light as they can be for the expected use but some people get a lot more use out of them.

My steel frames are 10 and 20 years old.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[rigorist]

I would love to see a citation for the claim that taconite tailings are "highly toxic".

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bonobo_Unknown]

Replacing your perfectly good car with a greener car is obviously not going to work out in terms of saving carbon emissions, given the amount of energy it takes to make a car. But (1) Good used cars are not thrown out, but reused and (2) you were going to buy a car anyway, so make it a green one...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Bonobo_Unknown]

you could make it greener: take out a processor and three hard drives. Shouldn't affect performance for a firewall, might even reduce noise levels to a more pleasant level...

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[faragon]

We mey be heading for another depression.

Not only in the US. Were I live, Spain, we have also an enormous debt (2.5x one year GDP), huge trade deficit, and bursting housing bubble. It looks terrible.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[nametaken]

Toss the baby shoes... I'm waiting to bronze mine. ;)

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Shadowlore]

A little random googling and I came up with it taking a ton of coal to produce 2,460 kilowatt hours of electricity. So if 615 people using a 4-watt computer instead of a 100+ watt computer save a ton of coal a week. Not exactly a major impact, but not trivial either.

Yes, it is trivial. It isn't even at the level of spitting in the ocean to raise the sea level.

"oh but if everyone does it" - I hear it coming. Sure, if a billion people do something it may not be. Bu tif everyone gave me a nickel ... I've seen those chain letters, and they started looong before email. So yes, hate to burst anyone's bubble (ok, not so much anymore, these bubbles are doing real damage), but what YOU do is trivial, inconsequential, and doesn't matter one spit's worth in the big scheme. Why are these bubbles dangerous? Because people do trivial things that make no difference thinking they are making a difference.

Let us put things in perspective, shall we?

In 2001 the U.S. had some 107 Million households consuming a total of 1.140 Trillion kWh. What are the largest consumers of electricity in said households? refrigerators and Air Conditioning, at about 14-16% each of the total. I bet computers aren't even a blip. If every one of of those households was using a 104kWh PC and switched to this, and didn't need to supplement it, and it was on 40 hours per week (per your assumption), you wouldn't even get to 2%. Yes, that is trivial. Even for a cost of about 30 Billion dollars. And I'm sure that not every one of those households has a computer, so even in a best case scenario your change is trivial. In a more representative sampling of computers in households, you don't break 1%.

On the other hand, improving the insulation of existing homes, most of which have poor insulation and even new homes could see significant improvements, returns a more substantive effect. First, the most power intense time is during the day - when the A/C needs to run. This is when the more expensive "ready reserve" of power stations are used. By reducing the load of A/C alone through improved insulation you get an "always on" savings (it works both ways, better insulation reduces heating costs as well), of a large and intensive load as opposed to an evening minor load. HVAC accounts for about a third of your bill, nationally, with central air about half of that (see above). However, electric space heating accounts for about 10% of the total. So better insulation saves on that aspect too (even for natural gas, heating oil, etc. 3% of electricity use nationally is for powering those pumps and fans)

Next up is refrigerators. Virtually every one of those households has a fridge. For 250 you can either replace an old and horribly inefficient one with a newer and more efficient one, or if already replacing it then for 250 more you can almost always get a much better one. As with insulation, this is an "always on" effect. Unless there is a power outage, the fridge runs 24x7x365 [insert WIlliam Perry joke here]. Even a minor 10% reduction in the cooling space will more than double the effect of this yet-to-be-proven "green computer", and for less money. And this isn't even considering the direct personal savings on the power bill (quick: you have 250 bucks and you want to lower your power bill. One way will get you a 4-5% reduction and the other will get you a 1% reduction. Which is better?). Further, about 1 in 5 households have two fridges, and the secondary is typically an old fridge which is inherently much more inefficient (5-10 years older).

That is why instead of it being a "stupid environmentalist cliche" is is really a "dangerous environmentalist cliche". A 90% reduction of a 2% consumption factor is trivial. A 10% drop in a 40% consumption factor is still arguably trivial but less so than the 1.8%. while at the national level (and personal) it is more expensive.

Once you factor in that most people "need' more than this computer will have to offer, it

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[poopdeville]

Because if you don't pay, you don't get service.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

Yeah, it oxidize fast but the oxide protect the rest of the aluminium, and yes steel frames rust and that was what I saw as the problem aswell.

I didn't know about the metal fatigue issue, maybe it's an issue for people riding downhill or actually use their mountainbike for what it was intended for. But then again isn't most expensive mountainbike frames aluminum as well? On the other hand I guess those people think it's ok to get a new frame every now and then.

I don't get the point, unless aluminium breaks more easily than steel frames.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

But can't those people just get more heavy duty aluminium frames? Is it still more brittle at the same weight?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[MichaelSmith]

Brittleness refers to the way it fails. A brittle material will break all at once (glass) while a more ductile material (steel) will deform.

I know a couple of people who have cracked aluminum bike frames, both above average riders. The frames are most likely designed for average riders.

I have heard it said that you don't want to use aluminum handlebars because they do come under a lot of stress and you don't want them to fail all at once.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Zashi]

So this thing is basically an updated version of the decTop ?

Depending on price, I'm mildly interested--assuming the bios is accessible and I can put my own version of linux on it.

I have a dectop. It's a nice little machine. Just wish it had usb 2.0, ethernet builtin, and mini-pci. Though I've heard rumors of a dectop version 2 that has all that. hhmm.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[davolfman]

We're at least already starting another recession. Retail stores have already cut hours past critical mass and are in the downward spiral of loosing what little profit they have left to exponential shrink. The underemployed at the lower end of the economy are buying less, the food prices are skyrocketing, and no-one's giving enogh raises to keep up with real inflation if they give raises at all. I've lost count of the number of little ways my employers have found to pay me less in the last year. The entirety of retail of business is doing it's moronic best to drop off the end of the economy and when it goes down it's going to start taking other industries with it.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

That's an interesting theory since the CherryPal cloud strange and applications are free with purchase of the hardware. They're ad-supported.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

Many of us still have 286 PCs. This is Slashdot. Welcome. I still have a working Commodore 64, too. When the parts fail, I drop them at an electronics recycling facility. That's pretty green, I think.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

You could, after you rescue another dumpster-ridden system with more performance per watt, recycle that one. A recycling search at MyGreenElectronics.org lets you find recycling centers near your ZIP code in the US and has information on recycling programs from big companies like Apple, Dell, and even Best Buy.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

It's better yet to recycle the P2-166.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

The great part is that by having the Eee as a second computer is that when you want to play a demanding game, you can fire up the your big beastly desktop just while you're playing without giving it up completely.

A second home system is one of the markets CherryPal is targeting (along with low-spec first computers, dorm systems, and maybe business desktops)

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[sm62704]

You are missing sometheing. The newer generation of hybrids plug into the grid; there was a slashdot article on the subject a few days ago. Unless you go in a long trip you cold get by without buying gasoline at all.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Eric Smith]

Many of us still have 286 PCs.

The point is that far more people threw away their 286 machines, and have the latest Core 2 Duo machines now, even if they mainly use them for word processing and spreadsheets that could be done perfectly well on the 286.

Of course a few people still have old computers. I've got more than my share, dating back to 1970. (Contrary to popular belief, there actually were computers before Microsoft Windows!)

When the parts fail, I drop them at an electronics recycling facility. That's pretty green, I think.

Hard to say. Much of the so-called electronics "recycling" gets purchased by Chinese companies, put into containers, shipped to China, and the stuff that they don't want gets dumped by the side of a road. The Chinese government then complains about us polluting their country. (Maybe if they didn't want our trash, they shouldn't buy it!)

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[somersault]

You really might as well throw away the whole puzzle if you already are missing a piece.

Depends if you can make a new piece or not.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[somersault]

Well, the fact that they say there are no updates and no risk of viruses in the same sentence really isn't a good start, for a web enabled device at least. I cringe (inside of course, I don't want to to look too weird) when I see ads for things that are "100% secure".

Since this is a desktop device and not a mobile one, then I'd think it could indeed last a very long time without needing to upgrade, as long as it does everything that you want it to. When holographic voice calling becomes popular then this thing probably won't cut it though :p

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[somersault]

I tend to digest mine to prepare them for use on the compost heap.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[mr_mischief]

The recycling place I use ships to a place in Illinois that recovers the precious metals and grinds the printed circuit boards into filler for road construction. The hazardous materials mostly get sent to a cement plant that uses them in the manufacture of their product. The rest go to a place where they reclaim rare-earth minerals and reclaim the lead for use in batteries.

It is good to know what kind of recycling place you're using, as some aren't as dedicated as others. Still, even if they just grab the gold and silver at least that's gold and silver that's not being mined for new stuff.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[JohnBailey]

So, um... where do I store all my used Kleenexes, Q-tips, fingernail clippings, banana peels, etc....

Compost them, and use the result as fertiliser.

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[Pope]

Well, I've seen what damage a plain old taco can do to my insides, I can easily imagine that a more concentrated and noxious form such as taconite could be orders of magnitude more toxic!

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

But not they wouldn't charge anything for connecting to the cloud would they?

Re:"green" vs "no upgrades"

[aliquis]

Hum, we can't be surfing the same web, the web I surf seem to kill my current machine which is a 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2GB ram.

Cloud access was free I think, so no.

Has to be said...

[Anonymous Coward]

So who is going to be the first to pop that cherry?

Sorry, couldn't help it.

Re:Has to be said...

[Gewalt]

So who is going to be the first to pop that cherry?

Not me, I live in north america, you insensitive clod. I'll have to wait for the CherryNTSC to get a taste.

Re:Has to be said...

[ciaohound]

no risk of viruses

It's virgin territory.

Re:Has to be said...

[ksd1337]

So who is going to be the first to pop that cherry?

If you even know about this website, you probably won't get to.

Re:Has to be said...

[Solmn]

Then it has to be responded to...! I plan to be the first to get a CherryPal C100, write about it, use it, give one to my parents, and determine if it will work for schools so every kid can get onto the internet and access the incredible K12 curriculums available. I am also skeptical to see if it will live up to its promise and deliver any more than any other netbook available. BTW, it really is a lime pc with a different logo on it. I spoke with Jack Campbell who developed it. You can see what he says at http://cherrypal.blogspot.com/2008/07/low-power-high-functionality-powerpc.html I'm told that CherryPal will be coming out with a laptop as well. I agree with using the term "netbook" to refer to this category of machines, appropriate for both the desktop and notebook version, the difference being only the built in monitor and keyboard. I am excited about how the CherryPal can bridge barriers to people who have not had access to computers or the internet because of money, fear, education or other challenges. I will be commenting on my experience of using it on my blog as soon as I get my own CherryPal C100! Although it may seem hypocritical to require your own monitor and keyboard for a "portable" device, I can't wait to find out if the comfort factor will outweigh the convenience. You can use CODE CPP206 to get your own CherryPal for $10 less than purchase price at Paypal. http://cherrypal.blogspot.com/

Re:Has to be said...

[Solmn]

And it has to be responded to...! I'm going to be the first on this page, anyway!
BTW, Jack Campbell says he developed the LimePC, which is what this is with a different logo. I posted what he says on my blog at http://cherrypal.blogspot.com/2008/07/low-power-high-functionality-powerpc.html
I'm told that CherryPal will be coming out with a laptop as well. I agree with using the term "netbook" to refer to this category of machines, appropriate for both the desktop and notebook version, the difference being only the built in monitor and keyboard.
I am excited about how the CherryPal can bridge barriers to people who have not had access to computers or the internet because of money, fear, education or other challenges. I will be commenting on my experience of using it on my blog as soon as I get my own CherryPal C100!
Although it may seem hypocritical to require your own monitor and keyboard for a "portable" device, I can't wait to find out if the comfort factor will outweigh the convenience. You can use CODE CPP206 to get your own CherryPal for $10 less than purchase price at Paypal. http://cherrypal.blogspot.com/

iTunes under Linux?

[mattMad]

How? The article is more confusing than informative on this aspect...

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[snl2587]

Same thing I was thinking. And I seriously doubt a PC like this would run it with Wine.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[Billhead]

Not only that, but Open Office as well!
And no virii! With only 20 per cent of the innards!

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[hostyle]

My guess is a browser with a vnc plugin, that does sound, etc. - vnc connects to their "cloud" server - probably subscription based ala apples MobileMe.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[Hordeking]

Same thing I was thinking. And I seriously doubt a PC like this would run it with Wine.

But I bet it would barf on wine.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[smilindog2000]

I'm all for this new era of ultra-cheap PCs with small flash memory, but for $50 less, I can get a gOS PC. Also, barring users from accessing the Linux running on the hardware just pisses me off. I read the article on EETimes about this new PC, but I didn't see the value proposition.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[sm62704]

Mouse over the link in the summary. If it says "the register" like this one did, you can be pretty sure that the summary is as informative, if less humorous (oops, sorry, that's "humourous").

I googled and found two other sites with news of this: Wired Blogs and Clean Technica

On a more green note, the CherryPal is supposed to sell for under $400 (monitor, keyboard, etc. not included). It should hit the market on August 4th, 2008. For that price and low energy use, it will appeal to wallets as well as the environmentally conscious. Though there is some understandable skepticism, I'll praise any manufacturer that lowers the bar on PC environmental impact.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[larry bagina]

Is the gOS PPC? Does the gOS run on 2 watts? Is the gOS the size of a router? There's the value.

More memory than efika, wireless, not lame.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[conspirator57]

it has a program counter. it will have hacks and virii. no updates is bad mojo.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[shaitand]

The gOS PC is a nightmare. Stop promoting it. It is underpowered, and the support is basically non-existent.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[mr_mischief]

I doubt it needs Wine. iTunes runs on OS X, which is built on a Unix core. It even runs on OS X on PowerPC, which is the same processor family the CherryPal uses. I don't know exactly what hackery they've used to get it running, but there's a fair chance it has nothing to do with a Windows compatibility layer when they could much more easily be running the PowerPC OS X version.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[xiaomai]

The fact that OS X is "built on a Unix core" doesn't help run mac apps on Linux. The libraries and windowing system aren't compatible. There are projects like GNUstep that implement the OpenSTEP standard, but as far as I know they don't shoot for binary compatibility (or extensions Apple has made to the API in Mac OS X). It's highly unlikely they'd be running the Mac version of itunes.

My guess is that it isn't running itunes at all. Maybe it's just using rhythmbox or something.

Re:iTunes under Linux?

[mr_mischief]

There's a CherryPal branded media player. According to the articles I've read, though, they do have the iTunes. It's not inconceivable that Apple would be willing (at the expense of CherryPal's investores, probably) to put iTunes on another platform in order to get the song sales.

Free-based computing

[iminplaya]

Sounds cool.

Re:Free-based computing

[bsDaemon]

Bender: well, if jacking on will make total strangers think i'm cool, then ok, I'll do it!

Re:Free-based computing

[Thelasko]

Free-based may sound cool, man. But next thing you know your laying in a pool of your own urine, in a truckstop restroom, somewhere west of Amarillo, Texas.

Re:Free-based computing

[Symb]

Two things come from Texas...

Cloud computer?

[SiriusStarr]

While I grant that it is somewhat difficult to nail down the definition of "cloud computing", what does this have to do with it? I see nothing here about distributed computing and I don't see how this computer could be used for any kind of cloud computing...

Re:Cloud computer?

[Bishop Rook]

That's if you define "cloud" to be "distributed systems." I think that's a better definition, but they're going with the marketroid definition of "it runs Web applications and uses network storage--and those applications and storage live In The Cloud!"

Re:Cloud computer?

[bsDaemon]

The point of this is that it connects to their cloud. Think of this as an X terminal that connects to a mainframe via the internet. The point isn't to build a cloud out of these things.

Re:Cloud computer?

[SiriusStarr]

Okay, got it; thanks. Am I the only one who's frustrated over the overuse of this new buzzword? :-/

Re:Cloud computer?

[bsDaemon]

Well, until the meme changes from "beowulf cluster" to "cloud," then I think we're safe.

Re:Cloud computer?

[mdf356]

Just imagine a Cloud of CherryPals!

Re:Cloud computer?

[sm62704]

Imagine a beowolf cluster of clouds!

Re:Cloud computer?

[Random BedHead Ed]

While I grant that it is somewhat difficult to nail down the definition of "cloud computing", what does this have to do with it?

If you want to define "cloud computing" in this context you need to consider the Web 2.0 paradigm this product leverages for its innovation. This is a "green" product that maximizes its use of the grid for next-generation social shaping, so from a Slashdot commenter's perspective you'll get web services, tagging, and real user participation if you buy this product. I think their idea is to have it be a dynamic framework for proactive immersion, which is basically win-win.

Re:Cloud computer?

[DF5JT]

Bingo!

Where's my price?

Re:Cloud computer?

[Abreu]

You win.

I do bullshit for a living, but you just... win.

Re:Cloud computer?

[MichaelSmith]

Lately a lot of people have been saying distributed when they mean centralised.

Re:Cloud computer?

[JackassJedi]

so... Imagine a cloud of these!

Re:Cloud computer?

[Monsieur_F]

A "cloud" computer? It must be vapourware!

Re:Cloud computer?

[rootooftheworld]

Too many buzzwords... must resist smashing BedHead Eds skull... *loads AK-47, shoots up C(?)Os*

More better circuitry

[Kohath]

Green Cloud? Can we have a Brown Hornet computer? How about a Black Canary monitor?

The Black Canary can tell us whether we can safely breathe in the Green Cloud.

Re:More better circuitry

[morgan_greywolf]

All I have to say is to thank the gods it's not a Brown Cloud! Phew!

Re:More better circuitry

[Minwee]

The Black Canary can tell us whether we can safely breathe in the Green Cloud.

Actually all that the canary can do is tell you that you can safely breath in the cloud. It's when the canary stops telling you that that you need to worry.

Re:More better circuitry

[dsginter]

From the submission:

It uses a Freescale processor that runs Linux and has no moving parts

The processor has NO MOVING PARTS!!! You bet your sweet bippie that this is more better circuitry. Finally - a solid-state microprocessor!

Re:More better circuitry

[Tumbleweed]

The processor has NO MOVING PARTS!!! You bet your sweet bippie that this is more better circuitry. Finally - a solid-state microprocessor!

What a load of BS - there are quite a few electrons moving around in there. That will wear it out eventually, I'm sure.

Re:More better circuitry

[negRo_slim]

What a load of BS - there are quite a few electrons moving around in there. That will wear it out eventually, I'm sure.

Well yeah, that's a given.

Re:More better circuitry

[rrohbeck]

No computing based on nano diamond rods? Meh.

Re:More better circuitry

[Darinbob]

Better yet, Freescale means it's probably a PowerPC, which means there's absolutely no danger of Microsoft trying to jam some version of Windows onto it.

Re:More better circuitry

[pixelite]

They could load up WindowsCE on to it. WindowCE ran on powerpc based pda if i remember correctly.

Re:More better circuitry

[Lorien_the_first_one]

XBox360 runs the Cell. Are you sure about that?

Re:More better circuitry

[mr_mischief]

It supports USB storage devices. A 500GB hard drive is another $100, or you can hook up an 8GB USB pocket drive for $30. That's assuming you don't have those things already. For about $68 you can get an 80GB USB drive that doesn't require a separate power source or you can get a 120GB bus-powered one for $70.

Oh, and my 40 megabyte hard drive on my 286 can store quite a bit of information in the right formats. A 4GB drive was a mid-end desktop part ten years ago and a high-end server part five years before that.

You can always throw your own NAS on your local network, too. Cisco markets one under their Linksys brand that pulls 60 watts to power itself and two SATA drives. Being a NAS, you could use it with a handful of computers and split the energy costs. If you had 4 CherryPals and one of those from Linksys, you'd be running four desktops with a decent amount of shared storage at 68 watts.

Digital Cameras?

[0100010001010011]

If this works with digital cameras and has even basic photo support I may have found a computer for mom. Every time I come home there's a camera that hasn't been offloaded since last time I was home.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[CastrTroy]

I told my mom to just forgo the whole computer when using her digital camera. Just take the card into the local photo shop, get the pictures printed that you want, and delete everything you don't want. Using a computer just complicates everything. My wife does pretty much the same. Leave everything on the camera until you print it and then delete it. Mind you, she also does daily transfers to the computer so that we can back them up, and upload them to the web, but it's basically a bunch of numbered files in a folder. The whole computer thing is completely unnecessary with digital cameras. Especially considering how many photo editing and touch-up functions you can get in a camera.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[maxume]

The other route is to just buy several 1GB memory cards. $10 takes a lot of pictures at this point.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[Darkk]

You can buy a photo printer with LCD display with a built-in card reader. I have the Epson Photo R380 and it works well. Very easy to use.

There is an argument that going to a photo shop is cheaper than printing the pictures out at home. I'm not too sure about it but I still like the idea of printing them out at home in complete privacy.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[jank1887]

I still like the idea of printing them out at home in complete privacy.

Very important for those pictures.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[mr_mischief]

I can recommend the HP PhotoSmart C6180. It's not the cheapest device around.

It does print from cameras, USB drives, several formats of memory cards, USB connection from a PC, or through its built-in print server over wired Ethernet or WiFi.

It's also a scanner, copier, and fax. It lets you replace the 6 different ink colors individually, so you're not throwing away unused ink in some combo tricolor or quadcolor cartridge.

The thing even scans over the network, and not just from PCs with special software installed. You can connect to the device's built-in web server with a browser and tell it to scan, then save the image from your browser.

I've had one for over a year and I have few complaints. One is that I need a separate phone handset if I need to pick up a call on the fax line for some reason, because there's no handset built in. That's annoying, but it's a $5 fix. It does cost about $70 to fill it with full-size ink cartridges, but since there's so little ink wasted that's not such a big deal. HP still gouges people on the ink, but their mid-level printers aren't as bad as the entry-level consumer ones.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[Darkk]

I've heard several positive things about the C6xxx series printers. The biggest thing is the ease of setup. User just install the software and it automatically finds the printer via the internal network and configures the PC. I'm old school, I'm used to assigning an IP to the printer and then physically adding it to the print queue or add printer on the PC.

It's cool things are getting easier to locate devices on the internal network and configure it for you. Certainly less helpdesk calls to HP.

Granted, I am not too thrill with their high prices of the ink cartridges and do wish they actually up the price on the printers a little but to offset the cost of the inks. I would actually print more if the costs are lower.

Interesting now with high gas prices I'm doing the same thing with inks. I only print when I have to.

Re:Digital Cameras?

[mr_mischief]

You have the option to set a static IP on the printer, which I did. It's much nicer, because I since I use the web server interface I don't have to mess with figuring out where it is this week or using dynamic DNS for it.

Why not give access to the OS?

[CastrTroy]

Why wouldn't they give access to the OS instead of running everything through FireFox. If everything ran in Firefox, you could still get a virus through a security hole in Firefox. For the same price you could easily build the identical machine with a real OS. If you only want to view the stuff in the web browser, just flip it to full screen mode.

Re:Why not give access to the OS?

[sm62704]

For the same price you could easily build the identical machine with a real OS

I think you might want to clarify what you said, as many here will take that as a cheap shot at Linux, which is a far better OS than XP. I have no experience with OSX and can't judge between it and Linux, but Linux is indeed a real OS and far, far superior to anything Microsoft produces.

Linux will run on anything from a wristwatch to a supercomputer. In fact, the world's third fastest computer runs Linux.

I think what you meant was "For the same price you could easily build the identical machine with the real OS.

But it's not that much cheaper ...

[bestinshow]

The problem with this device is that it isn't that much cheaper than a full budget PC that will whack this into the ground.

$250 for what is essentially a DTV receiver (my ex had a £25 Sagem Freeview receiver that had an integrated 250MHz PowerPC) with 4GB flash... sure it comes with 50GB of online storage, but they haven't reduced the affordability.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[mlts]

I agree that it has a nice size.

However, for $50 more at Wal-Mart, I can pick up an el cheapo Compaq sporting basic sound, 512MB of RAM, and a hard disk good enough to put a modern distro of Linux on it and have it work as a decent box. No, it won't boot in 5 seconds, but it will do a lot more for not that much more outlay.

If Cherry Pal could kick the price down to $100 or so, that would be an alternative, but right now, unless one wants a highly portable cheap computer (which for $50-$100 more, an EeePC can do the job with a monitor), this computer has a hard market to crack into.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[OrangeTide]

You should try to compare apples to apples instead of to Cherries. Where can you get a low power x86 for $250-300? Show me a 2W x86 that lets you browse the net, write documents, view porn, etc. The closest thing I can think of is a VIA Artigo and those are more like $500. (after you buy the RAM and HDD/Flash for them)

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[gdog05]

Wait a minute. Isn't "a nice size" a polite way of saying it's too small?

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[drinkypoo]

The question is, who gives a shit? Saving 20W on my processor is not going to make a big deal on my electric bill and it's not worth the amazing slowness of such a solution as opposed to something faster and cheaper. You have to offer people a compelling reason to go with your rinkydink computer, like making it amazingly cheap. Which this isn't.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[the_humeister]

It's not 2W, but the new Intel Atom boards let you do that in about 30W (4W for the processor itself).

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[OrangeTide]

VIA still has the Atom beat on watts.

And you're thinking of the 8W atom. the 4W atom is a different cpu not available on a standard motherboard.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[OrangeTide]

I think the trick is not calling it a computer. It's more like a web browsing appliance.

I'm not going to pretend that these things will sell well, and if I were investing my money in a startup. This would not be the one I'd go for. But I at least understand there exists some purpose to a small and cheap system such as this. Even if it won't fair well in the market.

If I could save 157 kilowatt-hours a year I think I would go for it.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[timholman]

A computer that requires only 2 W of power has a lot more utility than just being someone's desktop replacement. Small solar PV panels capable of 5W output cost around $50. Combine that with a charging circuit and a small NiMH battery pack, and you've got an ideal device for portable or embedded remote operation. Combine it with low-bandwidth (i.e. low power) wireless networking and there's a whole new world of applications you can tackle.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[bcrowell]

The problem with this device is that it isn't that much cheaper than a full budget PC that will whack this into the ground.
What figure do you have in mind when you say "isn't that much cheaper?" It's basically impossible to walk into a retail store and buy a new PC for less than $400-500. The Everex gPC does have better specs, and is only $200, but it's only available online. For people who like the small form factor, the CherryPal might be preferable to the gPC. The gPC's Linux distro also sucks to high heaven, so for people who aren't technically adept enough to install a linux distro themselves, there really aren't any good options out there right now for less than $400-500.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[Lorien_the_first_one]

How about that. I recently "built" a Dell 530N PC with Ubuntu and without a monitor for $259. I did that after someone wrote about how they were getting serious in promoting Ubuntu.

This wasn't a celeron machine, either. Duo Core, 1 GB RAM, 250 GB HD, too. Intel Graphics.

Perfect for what I'm doing and more.

What do you think?

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[Aehgts]

Still not x86, but in the same price and performance bracket is a Jack-PC.
It's a thinclient built inside a standard wall jack that can be powered over PoE.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[bestinshow]

My point was that if a company could afford to sell a 250MHz PowerPC based system for £25 and make a profit, 3 years ago, then doing the modern equivalent with more RAM, wireless and a bit of flash memory surely shouldn't cost > £125 + VAT. However I guess the problem is low sales volume and the online storage.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[lysse]

Where can you get a low power x86 for $250-300?

I think you might be labouring under a misapprehension about the kind of processors Freescale make these days.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[mr_mischief]

That's actually a tough call.

You have $249 for a 400Mhz PowerPC with two integer units, a double-precision FPU, one Ethernet, WiFi 4GB solid-state storage, and no sound ports vs. $295 for a single-core 500Mhz x86 with two Ethernet ports, no Wifi, sound, and 60GB 2.5" IDE drive. They have the same amount of RAM.

The CherryPal will be faster. The FitPC will have a wider range of software compatibility and more built-in storage. The CherryPal has online storage for free, but that's only as reliable as the business behind it.

Of course, there's also the Eee 2G Surf for $299. Asus lists the power draw as 22W. That's including the screen. It has sound, Wifi, wired Ethernet, twice the RAM, only 2GB on-board storage but supports USB drives and has an SD slot, and can run from battery for nearly 3 hours.

Re:But it's not that much cheaper ...

[lysse]

Meh. Ignore me and my lousy reading comprehension.

What's missing:

[Hoplite3]

Strange what small things they left off:
* no microphone jack, so no voip
* no extra usb jack, so no uploading pictures, printing, scanning, using a thumb drive, or loading your ipod

Those things would have hardly added to the size or cost and would greatly increase the usability of this thing.

Oh yeah, it'll be a pain to replace the "all firefox" interface with a more familiar linux desktop as you'll have to do the installation over the wire.

But I think the small size and pared down power are not so bad. It could be cool ... one day.

Re:What's missing:

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

* no extra usb jack, so no uploading pictures, printing, scanning, using a thumb drive, or loading your ipod

Or you could spend the extra couple of dollars and buy a decent USB keyboard with a couple of ports built in and use those ports. USB is chainable.

Re:What's missing:

[ksheff]

I guess they're intending for people to plug their USB mouse into the keyboard or invest in a USB hub and a USB audio device if they want to do all of those things.

Re:What's missing:

[Anonymous Coward]

USB Hub + USB Microphone. Done.

Re:What's missing:

[intx13]

Or you could spend the extra couple of dollars and buy a decent USB keyboard with a couple of ports built in and use those ports. USB is chainable.

Actually USB is not "chainable" in the sense of daisy-chaining (a la SCSI). Those USB keyboard with additional ports are just bus-powered USB hubs with USB keyboards permanently attached to one of the hub inputs.

You're still right, of course, this is one way around the problem of only two USB ports, if not particularly desirable. Bus-powered hubs can't support the same power needs as the original hub for obvious reasons. The point is that for a "cloud" (ugh) device, a second USB host to provide two more ports would make this thing great for webcam/microphone use - a cheap connectivity device for Skype, MSN, etc.

Re:What's missing:

[arose]

Talk about an ugly solution.

Re:What's missing:

[shaitand]

While having it included would be nice, you are pretending that bus powered hubs are the only usb hubs there aren't. USB hubs with an outside power source aren't even more expensive than the bus powered hubs and can run pretty much any usb device without the complications that arise from using passive hubs.

Re:What's missing:

[binford2k]

Oh yeah, it'll be a pain to replace the "all firefox" interface with a more familiar linux desktop as you'll have to do the installation over the wire.

Because that's *exactly* what their target market wants to do.

Re:What's missing:

[Symb]

It has two usb jacks.

2 watts?

[VincenzoRomano]

From their (weird) web site:
9vDC 2.5mm 10 watt AC-DC adapter power supply
So the box is not eating 2 watts, but 10, unless you can pump in it 9VDC in a more efficient way.

Re:2 watts?

[snl2587]

It's ok. The rest of the PC uses magic and fireflies to run. I'd say that's somewhere around 8 watts.

Re:2 watts?

[sexconker]

Turn in your geek card.

Watts != VoltAmps

Re:2 watts?

[superdave80]

Huh? P=VI

P=watts
V=volts
I=amps

Re:2 watts?

[superdave80]

AC-DC adapters usually specify their MAXIMUM power output to the device (watts). That doesn't necessarily mean that the computer will pull 10 watts.

Re:2 watts?

[Eternauta3k]

He's talking about apparent power

Re:2 watts?

[intx13]

Basic electronics to the rescue! Power usage depends on the load (the CherryPal) not the source (the power supply)*. The source can supply up to 10 W... the load will draw up to 2 W so there shouldn't be any problem.

*This is because P = I * V (power equals current times voltage) and current draw is a function of the load. The voltage is constant, therefore the power is also a function of the load. All power supplies work like this; having a PSU that can supply 1000 W does not mean it is supplying 1000 W. After all, what if nothing was plugged in? It's the load that matters here.

Re:2 watts?

[spazdor]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=1+volt+times+1+ampere

Are you sure you're a qualified geek licensing agent?

Re:2 watts?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

I'm a little skeptical on the 2 watts figure too.

The CPU alone is rated at 2 watts (quoted from the flyer from silicontkx, the Freescale reference manual does not have the power requirements in the version that I have), so I can only guess what the additional power requirements for the other components.

It is not uncommon to get a PowerPC based computer system running with hardrive and standard VGA output that only consumes around 5 to 8 watts. I do run bare-bone stuff that have embedded applications, so typical home use may require more (due to graphics, faster drives, mouse, sound, etc.)

The $250 price was what attracted my attention. Right now Freescale is quoting a quantity 1 price of $999 for a MiniITX based board from silicontkx.com (It may be much cheaper to purchase direct from Silicontkx, I don't feel like getting a sales call). Here is the info for those who are interested.

Re:2 watts?

[sexconker]

Yes. I am. Try again.

The difference between VA and W is the underlying cause of the OP's confusion.

Someone gave a Wikipedia link above.
I'm sure there'll be a vague description and lots of technical information that doesn't make any sense (in terms of a cohesive, direct explanation).
Or you could pick up a physics book.

Re:2 watts?

[mr_mischief]

Since the Freescale MPC5121e mobileGT processor has the PCI bus, SATA controller, PATA controller, timers, real-time clock, DMA controller, memory card controllers, Flash memory interfaces, Ethernet, 2D and 3D graphics, and USB integrated I'd like to ask which other components you're talking about.

It's a true embedded processor, and is actually listed as an automotive systems processor on Freescale's site. It has two IPUs, BTW, so I wish people would stop comparing it to single-core CISC chips like the Geode.

Re:2 watts?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

Since the Freescale MPC5121e mobileGT processor [freescale.com] has the PCI bus, SATA controller, PATA controller, timers, real-time clock, DMA controller, memory card controllers, Flash memory interfaces, Ethernet, 2D and 3D graphics, and USB integrated I'd like to ask which other components you're talking about.

I was thinking along the lines of the support hardware like power converter, external memory chips, and any other electrical interface or add-on functionality that the board maker wants to include on the processor board. In otherwords what is the power consumption at the power terminal of the board, not the Vin of the CPU.

Thing to remember is that a consumer friendly computing appliance that uses less than 10 watts is not something to sneer at. Of course, you can consume an additional 5 watts and become x86 compatible that will increase the available library of drivers and applications...

Re:2 watts?

[Bill_the_Engineer]

One more thing I failed to mention before hitting the submit key. The summary is touting a computer system that only consumes 2 watts. I assume the computer system will have other components besides the CPU itself.

Re:2 watts?

[mr_mischief]

Well, the memory is a good point. As are the headphone-level audio jack, the USB ports, and the VGA signal pins. None of those other than the memory are drawing any power until some peripheral is hooked up to them, though. Then the draw across them could be said to be caused by the peripherals.

More drivers and applications are always nice. How many of the low-voltage x86 chips have dual integer processing units, though? Using an ARM or a PowerPC to get multiple cores below 5 watts is a nice advantage.

iTunes?

[MMC Monster]

They have a version of iTunes for a Debian system that never needs to be updated?

I don't even think Apple has that yet!

Re:iTunes?

[TroubleMagnet]

I'll bet they run iTunes on their server and stream it. You will want to keep your music on the 50GB of network storage anyhow.

Another Stab at Ad-Supported Computing

[Wrath0fb0b]

According to CEO Max Seybold, beginning in the fourth quarter the company will be ready to roll out its real business model. Folks running Ad-Block may want to sit down for this: advertisements will run when the computer is loading an application. Now the company says most applications will load in only a handful of seconds, and Seybold promises never to artificially delay a load for the benefit of ad screen time. But we'd say its a pretty big omission in the literature.

This is especially glaring when the company says its guided by the values: Green, Fair, and Open. Those last two bits mean CherryPal vows to keep things honest and open-source with its customers. Seybold told us that the company will soon be describing in detail how the advertising works.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/21/cherrypal_launches_cherrypal_with_cherrypalcloud_and_cherrypal_etc/

While I have no objection to this sort of arrangement, I think a bit more information is forthcoming. Then again, they haven't actually released the device yet, so I'm going to assume that they will make it clear what is going on.

Re:Another Stab at Ad-Supported Computing

[King_TJ]

Nah.... this won't fly. That's just my unsubstantiated opinion - but let's see if I'm right.

For starters, "green" isn't really all that big a selling point/attraction for computer users. It may be a big "buzzword" in the media right now, but buying habits aren't really being driven by it in this sector.

Why? Well, for starters, no matter what the power draw is of a given PC, it draws pretty much nothing when it's powered off (or in a "hibernation" type mode, which is very similar). The typical PC *workstation* customer doesn't need/want to leave their machine on all the time. They just want a fast, enjoyable and reliable machine that boots up quickly whenever they need to use it. Sacrificing processing power for lower power consumption? Really only of interest to the average customer when it directly relates to improved battery life on a portable.

But secondly, anything done on the ad-based model? Comes across as a "toy" and "unprofessional" product from the get-go. Feels like something you should have received FREE, yet the business model can't sustain giving these mini PCs away free....

OT: Asus B202

[drgould]

Isn't Asus suppose to be releasing their Asus Box B202 about now?

• Intel Atom 1.6GHz processor
• 1GB or 2GB of memory
• 80-160GB hard drive
• WiFi
• Bluetooth
• SD/MMC/MS memory card reader.
• $269-$299
• mid-July release date

What's up with that?

Re:OT: Asus B202

[drinkypoo]

Looks great, I sure hope they sell it barebones. I want to netboot them for LTSP clients. Still seems a little overpriced given what the Wii will do for the same price; if Wii Linux were better-supported (if Nintendo at least didn't fight it) then there would be absolutely zero reason to buy that thing. And I mean zero.

Re:OT: Asus B202

[stupidcomputers]

What's up with that?

Intel doesn't want Atom to succeed. Rumor has it that Intel is purposely shipping a low volume of the Atom chips to drive consumers to higher power and higher margin chips. What would happen to the Home PC user when they find they can browse the net on a cheap, low power, Atom chip?

WTF?

[Quiet_Desperation]

CherryPal!?

Was "My Little Computer" fraught with trademark peril? Or could they not get Hello Kitty to return their calls?

There's a "popping cherry" joke here somewhere, but damned if I can find it.

Oh, wait... *snicker*

Re:WTF?

[sm62704]

I don't know about your town, but if it's got a cherry where I live, it ain't legal!

Nice try.

[oahazmatt]

No way I'm using my work PC to visit cherrypal.com, even if it is tech related and I can get away with it.

Re:Whats the point?

[Bishop Rook]

This isn't meant to be part of a cluster, it's meant to be a low-cost, low-power thin client for desktop productivity and multimedia apps.

Re:the cloud

[sexconker]

The cloud is that nebulous thing way out there that we can point to and say "See, it looks like a and it's so versatile that it also looks like a !"

You never have to attain the cloud, produce the cloud, or give someone access to the could.

You sell the cloud by pointing and dancing.

Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

They've buried Linux so that the end user doesn't see it; the entire UI is presented through Firefox.

Is there a Javascript interface to Linux that can use the URL line as a commandline to an embedded shell? Something like "javascript: alert(cmd('ls -l ~'))"? Or even better, a javascript option that can direct output to the main Firefox window (tabs for file descriptors). Of course, with security settings to lock untrustworthy javascript (eg. in downloaded HTML pages) in a crippled/chrooted sandbox, but allowing typed commandlines just like in a bash shell.

That way, Firefox can wrap the OS out of sight, except that skilled users could still get to the OS and a commandline. But without a whole extra terminal app, or any other apps for that matter.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[The Dancing Panda]

I don't see why you couldn't just SSH into it, though I guess we're assuming you don't have another computer?

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Rob Kaper]

They could easily do that with a small webserver component. Most firewalls do so and I bet it's the same here, it works. You wouldn't have to worry as much about client-side security either, the server only binds to ::1.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[nategoose]

OOh, I wanna run lynx in firefox!!

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[CastrTroy]

Maybe the machine doesn't come with the SSH server installed.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

Well, if it needs another computer, then it's just the same problem on the other computer. And the problem of needing another computer.

And really, what I'm looking for is just using Firefox as a commandline shell. Not so much because there's no other app, but because I'd like to integrate the shell into the Firefox app's process space. Commandline integration to the OS and to the other pages in the browser would be a great environment. Give Firefox an emacs plugin running the Perl debugger as its interpreter, and I'm in hyperheaven.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

How would you get commandlines to the webserver component?

And how does the localhost webserver protect from attacking HTML? All the HTML from a hostile remote host would have to do would be to include hostile commandline code in a clickable link pointing to localhost. The security problems would just be moved from the browser to the embedded webserver. Why not cut out the middleman?

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[drinkypoo]

You could use a web server on the system, and use bfexplorer (a php script) for a shell, file manager, and several other goodies. This is pretty much my plan for my SMCWAPS-G once I get it running something other than the included distribution. PHP is the big size consumer in this plan (maybe I can use PHP4) since you can use it with php-cli, which should work with bozohttpd or similar.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[sm62704]

It would allmost be worth the $400 bucks to see if you could hack it without a screwdriver. Don't tempt me like that, man, I can barely afford beer as it is!

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

But why add the complexity of a webserver, when what I want is just a very simple GUI to bash (or preferably Perl)? Why not cut out the middleman?

I guess your proposal has the advantage of being installable right now, without coding a new addon. But I'd like to see the shell more interactive with FF than HTTP would allow.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

I think the FF Javascript shell addon can already do that. I want one that speaks bash, or preferably Perl.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[drinkypoo]

If you did an AJAXy shell you could get as interactive as you wanted using php, mod_perl, et cetera. My plan is indeed only valuable due to being installable right now; otherwise, why integrate the shell into firefox? Just launch an xterm. When I need a quick shell I click the shell widget on avant-window-navigator; if I middle-click it it launches gnome-terminal.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[Doc Ruby]

Another advantage of a shell integrated within Firefox is simplicity. Using all the same Firefox GUI features for items linked in the Firefox shell output. Like if ls output filenames linked to the files (which terminals like GNOME's do, but with only limited operands on the embedded URL), the rest of Firefox's features could be applied to it. It's not just a matter of putting a shell launcher into Firefox, but actually merging the functions into one app that can use them all in combination.

Firefox's protocol parser and executor (ie. network retrieval) could be used without installing curl or wget, and with the same MIME handler DB for every operation. Scripts that integrate page DOMs with shell (or Perl, or other highly interoperable API language) scripts could be very useful.

I'd like a Firefox commandline shell to offer views of output as draggable icons, not just linked text, so I could select and drag/drop results into other apps, or just select them as args to other shell commands. Further, Firefox's native network features could let me do all that targeting any remote host with a server, translating the shell commands into perhaps ssh commands, and wrapping the results from the remote shell into Firefox's display styles and markup.

Really, integrating a commandline into Firefox, with the commandline able to access the DOM and Firefox's MIME handling/rendering and protocol parsing/transacting functions is a great synthesis of the commandline and the GUI, without modally excluding each from the other. And since Firefox already does most of it, I'd start by upgrading Firefox.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[gzipped_tar]

Yes. See my sig. Don't know whether the CherryPal spin of Firefox supports extensions, though.

Re:Firefox Commandline Plugin?

[drinkypoo]

Well, there are some javascript debuggers etc for firefox which provide a command line and which execute javascript on the fly. I'd guess most of what you need is javascript implementations of the usual shell builtins (e.g. 'cd') and an error handler for missing functions that checks to see if there is something appropriate in your path and executes it with appropriate arguments. This seems like a logical starting point...

Re:As soon as I can jam BSD on it

[LotsOfPhil]

It'll make a nice firewall. Otherwise, not so much.

It only has one ethernet port.

I assume by "iTunes" they mean...

[argent]

I assume by "iTunes" they mean "music player".

I didn't know iTunes had been kleenexed.

Central Controled Computer

[Nymz]

Having 'someone else' responsible for configuring, upgrading, and maintaining my personal computer would have some nice benefits, but I still prefer the ability to be responsible for myself. I wonder if there's a correlation between this, and political beliefs (free republic government vs central controled regime).

Re:Central Controled Computer

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

It is certainly commonly observed that geeks, as a population, have a libertarian bent; but I doubt the correlation goes as far as one might expect(although it should, if people considered the matter carefully, go farther than it does).

I don't think that, for the vast majority of people, computer maintenance is perceived as something with that sort of political dimension. Computers aren't old enough yet for them to have acquired semi-mythic status in the "rugged-independent" canon, the way cars, guns, and various wilderness techniques have and surprisingly few people are familiar with just how much power the people who control your computer have.
People, to a surprising extent, think of computer maintenance as an onerous chore(which it can definitely be) without any real political implications(which is where they are wrong). So long as they think that, there isn't going to be much more of a correlation between computer repair and political beliefs than between laundry service and political beliefs.

I think your suggestion ought to be true; but, as long as most people are wholly ignorant of computers, is unlikely to be. Among those passionately familiar with computers, you do indeed see some elements of it(though virtually all geeks want control over their own computers, unless it is Apple's "reasonable" DRM, by which many seem dazzled.); but among those who know little, no such pattern exists.


Minor, anecdotal, case in point: Remember Clipper, and the bad old days of the Feds' war on crypto generally? Bill Clinton, baby-eating bogeyman of the right's imagination, tried to control America's access to strong crypto(classified as a munition). If people thought about computer stuff the way they think about other things, Charlton Heston would have tattooed the PGP sourcecode onto his chest and smashed a clipper chip with his bare hands, all during a press conference. As it is, I couldn't find even a single mention of the issue on the NRA's site.

New Perimeter Device?

[mpapet]

As long as I can admin it like a Debian distro, I'll take two. They aren't going to get rich at $250 ea., but if their landed cost is below $80 they will be in good shape as long as they have the capital to build some volume.

I run a now-discontinued nslu2 as a home network hub, arm-powered and ***plenty*** fast. http://www.cyrius.com/debian/nslu2/

The only time I've noticed any slow-down issues was when cups was generating certs for itself. Which is to be expected. It serves the printer, scanner, very advanced firewall, trustworthy dhcp serving, webdav file share, the list goes on... This box has VGA out, so I can make it a mythtv head.

Re:New Perimeter Device?

[Locklin]

From what I see on Google, the nslu2 has only usb and network ports. Are you sure it has a VGA out?

Re:New Perimeter Device?

[larry bagina]

I think he's referring to the cherrypal's vga out. (I own an nslu2 and am interested in non-x86 computers).

Can they make it...

[Thelasko]

half an inch thick with an XGA touchscreen?

Allow me to suggest an alternative

[Anonymous Coward]

without all the "cloud" mumbo jumbo. http://www.fit-pc.com./

Re:Allow me to suggest an alternative

[mlts]

Thanks for the fit-PC link. It looks to be like the ultimate firewall box, with two independent 10/100 ports out.

This is something what the Cherry Pal people should have done -- make their box with multiple interfaces, and perhaps an ExpressCard jack for more expansion. Then, I know people would buy the box just to have a solid, customizable firewall, and perhaps be used as a NAS head if someone wanted to plug in an eSATA card and an external drive. Adding wireless would be a plus too.

Interesting, but questions arise...

[EriktheGreen]

Questions:

1. Is the $250 the real price, or a loss leader?
2. Put another way, can the company make money selling just the hardware, or do they make money by selling "cloud" services that people may not want?
3. Will the device be open enough to be hackable, or will it go the way of i-opener, punishing those who open the hood?
4. Will the company likewise open the "cloud" for development? Can ordinary non-corporate hacker types write and sell software for it?
5. Is the company hoping to sell the devices, lock in users to their cloud long term, and control the market that way, ala Microsoft?

Erik

Re:Interesting, but questions arise...

[mr_mischief]

The manufacturer has said the online apps and storage will be ad-supported with no subscription fees necessary.

That's a maximum rating on the power supply

[name_already_taken]

From their (weird) web site: 9vDC 2.5mm 10 watt AC-DC adapter power supply So the box is not eating 2 watts, but 10, unless you can pump in it 9VDC in a more efficient way.

The 10 Watt rating is the maximum output of the the power supply - that means the computer itself has to draw less than 10W. It was probably cheaper to buy an off-the-shelf 10W power supply than have a custom 2W PSU built. It does not mean that the computer itself draws 10W.

Re:That's a maximum rating on the power supply

[VincenzoRomano]

Isn't a standard 4 watts PSU cheaper than a 10W one?

Re:That's a maximum rating on the power supply

[drinkypoo]

You almost have it right. The device has two USB 2.0 ports which are required to provide substantially more power than USB 1.x ports. The additional power is for operating USB bus-powered devices. I have a SMC SMCWAPS-G which is an itsy bitsy linux box powered by a shrunk 486 with 32MB, with ralink wifi, and with an IDE bus and two USB 2.0 ports. It came with a 5V/3A adapter which doesn't work (it's from some other country, and came with an international adapter which, gosh, doesn't work either.) I hooked up a Zip supply (5V/1A) and it's working fine, but I didn't put a laptop disk in it, either. My plan is to alter the software, put pppd on it, and use it to share my modem connection and my music.

Re:That's a maximum rating on the power supply

[serialdogma]

No, both USB 1.1 and 2 require that devices plugged into the root hub be allowed to draw up to 500mA at 5V.

"Cloud"

[tgd]

Put the word "cloud" in your business plan and the VCs will definitely listen to you these days.

I won't say its a bubble, but its definitely the hot trend of the last few months. A ton of companies have been funded this year dealing with "cloud computing" and we'll be seeing a lot of product and marketing announcements over the next 12 months about it... and most of them will make no sense (like this...)

(And yes, I talk regularly to VCs...)

Re:"Cloud"

[Tumbleweed]

Put the word "cloud" in your business plan and the VCs will definitely listen to you these days.

Two words: Cloud Porn

Re:"Cloud"

[tgd]

You're funded!

Wait... um... nevermind... um...

*skulks away*

Re:The cost is $249

[Anonymous Coward]

Standards on slashdot seem to be decreasing these days. If you're too lazy to RTFA, at least RTFT, or at least RTFFWT (read the fine first word of the title). $250 Freescale-based "green" "cloud" computer

Nice PC for the car

[RandoX]

I've always wanted to hook a PC to a 8" USB Touchscreen and use it as a multimedia center for the car. Audio, navigation, video (when appropriate), maybe even wifi here and there...

Slap a 16-32 gig thumb drive for media storage, and it sounds perfect.

Re:Nice PC for the car

[X0563511]

Sounds to me like a completely inappropriate use for this hardware. Unless you happen to have a high-bandwidth link in your car?

Re:Nice PC for the car

[mr_mischief]

Why do you need a high-bandwidth (I assume you mean high data rate) link in the car when there's a built-in media player and it supports the thumb drive the poster mentioned? Only most apps are over the cloud on this thing.

Re:Nice PC for the car

[X0563511]

Something like this is probably better for you, especially with the heatsink-case and special-purpose power supply. The power coming from a car's alternator/battery would be hell on a normal supply.

Granted this is a bit pricey, but this is just one I've seen from memory - I'm sure there are plenty of other "car PC" systems out there for *nix/BSD/etc, and there's lots of parts available to build it yourself too.

USB does it all

[davidwr]

With a powered USB hub and a USB sound port, and custom firmware, you should be good to go for VoIP and the rest.

Let's hope they left open some way to flash the kernel.

Re:USB does it all

[cmburns69]

Firefox + Custom plugin = access to whatever the heck you want.

Cloud?

[IronChef]

In this case, is a "cloud" a "company you hope doesn't go out of business?"

Re:Cloud?

[4D6963]

Cloud computers are designed to only run vapourware.

Re:the cloud

[Poltras]

much like any other buzzword when it started (.Net anyone, web 2.0, even the internet at its time).

Re:As soon as I can jam BSD on it

[xaositects]

It only has one ethernet port.

ah, but it does have a usb port into which you could plug a usb network card. i used to have an old laptop with a broken lcd screen that i used as a firewall in this fashion.

less than $99

[Henriok]

The EFIKA development board with the exact same specifications was sold for $99.

Re:less than $99

[larry bagina]

The Efika doesn't have wifi or VGA and has only half the ram.

Re:Whats the point?

[ksheff]

or buy an old Mac mini.

Re:The cost is $249

[quantumplacet]

And to make it even better, he was modded informative....

Obligatory

[BlackCobra43]

I, for one, welcome our meteorological phenomenon overlords.

Cool.. Or not?

[Apoorv Khatreja]

The concept sounds really interesting, but isn't it overpriced at $250? The Asus Eee PC was priced around $250 if I remember correctly. Why would anyone want to lose control over their system and pay more for it?

sosumi

[tabby]

"listen to iTunes"

Apple has either ported iTunes to it, it runs Windows... or is Apple sending their lawyers over after they are done with Phystar.

Or what they really mean is 'listen to digital music' in which case that is deliberate deceptive advertising.

Re:the cloud

[spazdor]

Sir, I will pay you 40 shillings to make it rain upon my orchard!

Re:As soon as I can jam BSD on it

[spazdor]

Router on a stick!

I got....

[Darkk]

I got your Cherry!!

Voluntary Association

[bill_mcgonigle]

I wonder if there's a correlation between this, and political beliefs (free republic government vs central controled regime).

Unlikely. I feel fine letting the Fedora Project update my machines because if they go insane, I can always go Debian or Gentoo.

If somebody were forcing me to use Fedora, they'd probably be less fantastic.

I see...

[Bootarn]

It uses a Freescale processor that runs Linux and has no moving parts.

Did I miss something? When did processors have moving parts?

Re:I see...

[Random BedHead Ed]

When did processors have moving parts?

When they got fans clamped onto them. Low-wattage processors usually ditch the fans, so they're quieter and don't require the same sort of ventilation.

Re:I see...

[Bootarn]

Oh, I originally meant this as a joke. Shame on me! ;) I based this "joke" on the fact that the processor itself doesn't have any moving parts, but the coolant does.

Re:I see...

[Random BedHead Ed]

Oops. Whooooooosh! :)

Wait, are they a charity?

[JSBiff]

One the one hand, companies have to make a profit. They can't survive if they don't make a profit on every unit they sell (or at least most of the units they sell). What is a 'fair' profit? Hard to say.

      That said, this doesn't really sound like a complete rip-off to me. That's because your 'cost analysis' sounds way too simplistic to me, and I think their 'costs' are a bit more than what you estimate. Sure, the process, ram, mobo might be cheap. But, to begin with, they had to hire engineers to design the thing. If you have engineers, you have salaries and benefits (granted, this is probably designed somewhere in Asia where they can pay engineers a lot less than in the US or Europe). Engineers imply managers, accountants, buildings, utilities, insurance, etc. You also need to build a manufacturing facility to assemble these things, which implies buildings, machines, labor (again, the labor is probably pretty cheap, but it's still a cost). Once they are built, you need marketing and distribution - it costs money to ship things from Asia to wherever they are being bought. On top of that, you have to build into the price of the goods not only a profit for you, but a markup for your partners who are going to sell them for you (unless you are doing *only* direct-sales, which not many companies do).

      If I had to guess, I would guess that real costs are somewhere around $125, with $125 to split between resellers and the OEM (from my limited experience, seems like most companies try to go for about a 100% 'gross margin' which might sound like a lot, but when you consider they are selling low-cost goods, and not necessarily large volumes, it becomes a little more justifiable), with the OEM getting $50-75. That doesn't, actually, sound like an outrageous profit margin to me (although, again, my assumptions could be wrong).

      The other thing about stuff like this - when new products are introduced to market, they will typically be more expensive than later. The thing is, the company may make *no* actual profit until they've sold some quantity - maybe 10,000, or 100,000, or some other number depending on how they setup their cost structure. If the product turns out to be fairly popular, once they've passed that magic point of profitability, they may reduce costs to increase sales volumes further, so the price on these could maybe drop to 199, then maybe eventually 149. It all depends, again, on how popular they are, I suspect.

I smell thin client

[nurb432]

Looks like a nice little cheap thinclient that can still hold its own.

The software list?

[tomscott]

So here is some of the software they listed: integrated software and an embedded Linux (based on Debian) that has been stripped down to support Open Office, Firefox, iTunes, instant messaging, and multimedia
When did Apple make a version of iTunes for Linux? Not that I want to use it but I know lots of other people who would like to switch to Linux but the only piece of s/w I can't replace for them is iTunes.

$250?! Use a PC Engines Alix 1C For the DIY'er...

[niko9]

$138 dollars gets you a PC Engines 1C in a Mini ITX form factor:http://www.pcengines.ch/alix1c.htm

Specs:

CPU: 433 or 500 MHz AMD Geode LX
DRAM: 128 or 256 MB SDRAM on board
Storage: CompactFlash socket, 44 pin IDE
Power: 12V DC, DC-DC converter on board. No bulky ATX PSU needed.
Expansion: miniPCI + 3.3V PCI + LPC + optional I2C
Connectivity: 1 Ethernet channel (Via VT6105M 10/100)
I/O: 2 COM, 4 USB, 1 LPT, audio, VGA
Board size: 6.7 x 6.7" (miniITX), low profile.
Firmware: Award BIOS

Board: $138
Case: $10
PS: $12
4GB CF $14 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211191

Cheaper and more open.

This is cheaper

[symbolset]

Since we're talking about the walmart cluster try one of these gPC units for $199. Power is really low, but not as low as the item in TFA. I've bought them and they work great for linux or XP. Slap a couple terabyte SATA drives in there and it makes a fine media server.

If you want to save some watts and noise convert it to DC with a pico-psu for another fifty. If you're going for high density get four and mount the other three motherboards inside the first one, or mount them all on sheet of lexan - they make an interesting digital industrial wall covering for about the price of a nice framed print. BTW, if you're going for the wall covering look with the PicoPSU I would recommend Intel's Atom motherboard instead. It burns fewer watts and is cheaper because it doesn't come with a case and PSU. You'll have to buy a gig stick of DDR2 to go with it, but you're still money ahead going this way.

marketplace chaos

[bcrowell]

I think we're currently in a period of marketplace chaos, and when the dust settles we'll find that a $1000 PC in a tower case seems about as archaic as a radio in a wooden case the size of a washing machine.

The biggest computer manufacturers are still selling machines in the $1000 price range. If you look inside, you'll see that these machines are typically mostly air inside. They could have been put in a package the size of a hardcover book, but consumers associate the big case with a powerful machine. Part of the reason these machines cost so much is profit-taking by the manufacturers, and part of it is the artificial impetus to get insanely powerful hardware, because software like Vista and OOo is coded so inefficiently. This whole setup is a house of cards, though. People don't need the equivalent of a 1990 supercomputer in order to send email and do their word-processing.

The trouble is that although a lot of small manufacturers have been testing the waters with lower-priced machines, the big ones haven't been interested. This is partly analogous to compact cars versus SUVs -- the profit margin on an SUV can be as much as $15,000, whereas the profit margin on a Ford Focus might be under $1000. Even if there's demand for the Focus, Ford has been more interested in pushing the SUV, because that's where the profit was. Then you have Apple selling a tightly integrated package of hardware and software, which people are willing to pay big premiums for. There's also the Windows tax, which hides the vast differences in hardware cost between a bleeding edge machine and something with lower specs.

For a long time, the only low-cost PCs I was ever able to find in retail outlets were the Great Quality PCs sold at Fry's, which came with Linux preinstalled. They were wonderful machines, and I still have a bunch of them in a lab at school, working great. They sold for about $200. However, Fry's stopped carrying them about a year ago. Apparently the high rate of returns was eliminating their profit margin. A lot of users were buying them to put pirated copies of Windows on, and then if they had a problem with the install, they'd return the machine.

There's also the Everex gPC. I own one, and reviewed it. Perfectly reasonable hardware, although the linux distro they put on it was junk. Judging from the customer feedback on WalMart's site, they've been some of the same problems as Great Quality with keeping their gPC customers satisfied -- a lot of people buying them apparently don't understand that the machine they're buying doesn't do Microsoft.

It's great to see something like the CherryPal come out. One interesting thing about it is that they're exploring the low end of the hardware specs that are necessary to run a web browser. This is conceivably a way for them to get around the low profit margins that have so far crippled investment in this end of the market. Here's a comparison of the specs of three cheap consumer linux boxes:

Linksys WRT54G 4.0 router -- 200 MHz, 16 MB ram, 4 MB SSD
CherryPal -- 400 MHz, 256 MB ram, 4 GB SSD
gPC -- 1500 MHz, 512 MB ram, 80 GB HD

The Linksys v. 4 router cost something like $50 when it was available. (Later versions downgraded the specs and used a different OS instead of Linux.) Let's estimate what it would have cost today to upgrade its specs to something more like a desktop system (assuming it had been an upgradable system, which it wasn't). Paying retail today it would cost me $45 for a 1.8 GHz celeron cpu, $23 for 512 MB of ram, and $15 for a 4 GB keychain drive. Adding that on to the $50 retail price of the router, you get $133. Of course a computer manufacturer wouldn't be paying anything like these retail prices for the parts, so this is really a vast overestimate of what it would cost to manufacture a system like the CherryPal. I suspect their manufacturing price is more like $50.

Re:marketplace chaos

[merreborn]

The biggest computer manufacturers are still selling machines in the $1000 price range. If you look inside, you'll see that these machines are typically mostly air inside

Yeah... have you ever tried working in one of the smaller cases?

When I met my wife, she had a compaq in a slightly smaller than average case. Unfortunately, making the case smaller meant that you had to take out the power supply to add a stick of RAM.

And of course, the closer you pack components, the more difficult cooling becomes. And manufacturing costs rise.

There is definitely something to be said for smaller cases in some contexts. But for anyone interested in building their own machines for cheap, and doing their own upgrades, big cases are still desirable.

And really, as much as I love your radio analogy, I have to contrast it with a car analogy: things keep getting packed in tighter and tighter under the hood, making maintenance that used to be simple take hours longer than it would have taken a '70s era car.

To a certain extent, I agree with you wholeheartedly -- for some applications, 1998's hardware is good enough, and it should come in small packages. The prime example of that is smartphones/PDAs. But for other applications, "big" and "overpowered" is exactly what I want.

Re:marketplace chaos

[bcrowell]

Yeah... have you ever tried working in one of the smaller cases?

I agree that for a machine I want to work on myself, a tower is great. Heck, even with a tower there are times when I'm scraping my knucles and cussing and swearing. But when's the last time you upgraded your transistor radio? We're headed into an era when PCs will sell for $50, and will be disposable.

But for other applications, "big" and "overpowered" is exactly what I want.

Sure, but that's only for those applications. You could compare it to a TV. A lot of affluent families these days own four TVs, but only one of those is the giant home-theater one. The rest are cheap consumer stuff from Costco, which they'll throw in a dumpster in 5 years.

Thin clients are greener

[TheDarkener]

First of all...2 watts.... *with* wifi? Puh. lease. I'll dub this vaporware until they prove me wrong.

Secondly.. LTSP and thin-client computing in general are on their way in (fast) as the eco-friendly alternatives to traditional workstation/server model. The educational sector is one example that are jumping on the bandwagon - not only for power savings, but for central administration (and if Linux is used, which many schools I have been contracted from are excited about) and the nice "not-paying-M$-for-Vista" aspect.

"Cloud computing" is just another buzzword with no merit behind it. Thin-clients are solid, functional and are proven - and are improving every day to provide the functionality they weren't able to provide yesterday (such as synced sound/video output, storage facilities, peripheral support). In the future I'm sure LTSP & related projects will improve in the "retail" sector for at-home thin-client computing.

Re:Thin clients are greener

[dbIII]

First of all...2 watts.... *with* wifi? Puh. lease. I'll dub this vaporware until they prove me wrong.

The Nintendo DS had Wifi several years ago - I'm not sure of the total power consumption there but you get several hours from a very small battery.

Pointless, Really

[JoeSixpack00]

So 2 USB ports, but no PS/2 ports, which means no thumb drive or iPod support - yet the web page boasts of listening to iTunes. Why would anyone use iTunes if they a) couldn't connect an iPod to transfer their songs to, and b), couldn't connect a cd drive to burn their songs on.

Look, the whole novelty is cute, but the thing has no upgradeability, and isn't very fast. For only about $150 more, You could build your own pc using one of AMD's 45watt cpus, and an 80+ efficiency certified PSU. The computer would be 4 times as fast and 3 times as functional. Here's their specs:

Freescaleâ(TM)s MPC5121e mobileGT processor, 800 MIPS (400 MHz) of processing 256 MB of DDR2 DRAM 4GB NAND Flash-based solid state drive WiFi 802.11b/g Wi-Fi Two USB 2.0 ports

And for only $90 more, this is what you could build:

Athlon X2 4450e 2.3ghz (runs at 45 watts), 1MB DDR667 (only 1.8 volts), 500MB SATA II Caviar GP, Antec Earthwatts 380w 80+ efficiency PSU, Samsung 20x DVD Burner, ECS 780G Chipset mother board, Rosewill R222-P-BK Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case

That's a total of $340, including shipping. Sometimes cutting out features for the sake of price or efficiency cuts out too much functionality

Re:Pointless, Really

[thedistrict]

Unless this is supposed to be the new wave of tablet PCs, for just word processing. That said, I agree with you that it seems pointless. I mean, try running a few aps at the same time with that little power. You're going to pull your hair out soon enough.

Re:Pointless, Really

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

So 2 USB ports, but no PS/2 ports, which means no thumb drive or iPod support

My girlfriend's computer is sitting on her desk. It has two USB ports. One has a keyboard plugged in and a mouse and ipod plugged into the keyboard. The other USB port is empty. How then, do you infer no iPod support from 2 USB ports? It seems to work for her.

Why would anyone use iTunes if they a) couldn't connect an iPod to transfer their songs to, and b), couldn't connect a cd drive to burn their songs on.

Maybe they just want a good UI for listening to music they download either purchased or free from the internet.

Look, the whole novelty is cute, but the thing has no upgradeability, and isn't very fast. For only about $150 more...

$250 versus $400 is a pretty big difference for buyers on the very low end.

Re:Pointless, Really

[mr_mischief]

You have PS/2 port thumb drives?

Re:Pointless, Really

[mr_mischief]

Ummmmm... 400 Mhz dual-IPU PowerPC. This isn't your father's Pentium II. I can run Photoshop, Safari, Firefox, and Pidgin on my single-core G4 500 just fine.

Microsoft will own it soon if it works

[MikeV]

Cheap hardware? Subscription based services? If they make this work, I predict that Microsoft will own them in very short order. Which, of course, could be the point of this entire project. Invent something along the lines of what Microsoft is looking to do, implement it successfully and wait for the big fat offer. After all, Microsoft isn't known for stepping into the void - they wait for someone else to do the hard work then they buy them or mimic them out of existence.

In other news...

[marco.antonio.costa]

The first single-purpose computer has been releasd, it allows you to keep your personal files in the Internet, no UI, no operating system, 3 functions for only $250.

Don't you all cheer at once. \o/

Re:As soon as I can jam BSD on it

[tzot]

A fit-PC has two ethernet ports.
I have a fit-PC, and do use it. Not as fast, possibly, and double the consumption, but what the heck. It works. Although it probably is more expensive.
Also, why are we talking about old news? Oh. It's a slow day for slashdot.

Surprisingly good for gaming!

[StefanJ]

Ultima II and "Hunt the Wumpus" SCREAM on this thing!

This sounds familiar...

[smitty97]

Lets see, low power consumption, stripped down & hidden OS, web browser, music, multimedia, web apps, wifi, boots quickly, flash drive, no installing software, no viruses, free support... Sounds like last year's iPhone

Eye.fi

[albee01]

I have the same problem. I came across the Eye-Fi recently and am seriously considering getting my parents one. It's basically an SD card with built-in wireless that auto offloads pics to the computer whenever it's in range of your access point.

CherryOS?

[srh2o]

I would recommend they name the OS something other than CherryOS

Resolution: 1024x768

[Rick Richardson]

Next.

Let's Be Realistic

[JoeSixpack00]

My girlfriend's computer is sitting on her desk. It has two USB ports. One has a keyboard plugged in and a mouse and ipod plugged into the keyboard. The other USB port is empty. How then, do you infer no iPod support from 2 USB ports? It seems to work for her.

Realistically speaking, how many keyboards have a usb input on them? I also take it that you have no need for a printer. Since you're sticking to the budget angle, I should remind you that almost all budget printers are now usb only.

$250 versus $400 is a pretty big difference for buyers on the very low end.

When I did the math, it was $340, not $400. That's an increase of $90, assuming the CherryPC ships for free.

Maybe they just want a good UI for listening to music they download either purchased or free from the internet.

So an extra $90s to increase your performance 10 fold is out of the picture, but they have enough money to afford digital downloads? Would you also care to explain how a pc sporting 400Mhz of processing power and 256mb of RAM is going to run iTunes without slowing down to a crawl?

Re:Let's Be Realistic

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Realistically speaking, how many keyboards have a usb input on them?

Every one I own not in a box of old parts.

I also take it that you have no need for a printer. Since you're sticking to the budget angle, I should remind you that almost all budget printers are now usb only.

The printer is plugged into the USB printer port on the wireless hub so all the computers can use it. It used to be plugged into the keyboard on an old computer except for when she used her iPod, when she'd unplug the printer until she was done. That's not really a terrible option if you're using a budget system to begin with.

Look, the whole novelty is cute, but the thing has no upgradeability, and isn't very fast. For only about $150 more...

$250 versus $400 is a pretty big difference for buyers on the very low end.

When I did the math, it was $340, not $400.

I quoted the entire exchange. See where the $400 number comes from? You said $150 more than $250, for your first alternative, which adds up to $400.

So an extra $90s to increase your performance 10 fold is out of the picture, but they have enough money to afford digital downloads?

Often it is putting money together all at once that is a problem when you're really poor. I know I've been there. In any case, some digital downloads are free, both legal and potentially illegal. Some of us actually like indy music.

Would you also care to explain how a pc sporting 400Mhz of processing power and 256mb of RAM is going to run iTunes without slowing down to a crawl?

That's a very interesting question. The article claimed it supported iTunes, but did not explain how. Potentially, they are running it remotely and simply connecting to a VNC session using a Firefox plug-in, such that all the processing is done in the "cloud" they refer to, while the processor handles the interface, like a thin client of old.

Re:Let's Be Realistic

[mr_mischief]

Okay, $4 USB hub. Fixed. Printer with Ethernet print server, or a $20 Ethernet to USB print server appliance. Fixed. $259 Dell Inspiron 520N, anyone?

I don't get it, didn't they already make the WebTV

[hellwig]

Back in the 90's I never saw the point of a machine that could only be used to browse the web. True, the web is much larger now, but I still don't see the point of a web-only machine. You can't possibly conceive of ever needing that document you typed without having access to the internet? I know my internet goes down occasionally, and if it's due to a storm taking out the cable line, it's going to be down for a while.

At least WebTV came with a keyboard/mouse and used your TV for display. This sucker doesn't come with any peripherals, and isn't TV ready, so you have to buy an additional monitor, mouse, keyboard just to run this thing.

Am I the only one bothered by the fact that cherrypal.com redirects to an IP-based http server?

So what happens when that dies?

[pathological liar]

It's not unthinkable, the S3 outage was just a couple months ago.

Same old, same old

[Coward Anonymous]

This same old tired idea keeps popping up over and over again with a change of buzzwords. Now it's the cloud, before it was the network (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_computer) and there was the Audrey in between.
However, the latency is always there and _your_ data is always elsewhere. Two very problematic issues that will always doom these efforts.

Well...

[RAMMS EIN]

For some reason, I first thought that this would be a competitor to the Eee and its ilk. A Freescale CPU in a netbook sounds like it could be good for battery life, although I wonder how much you can still save by putting in a more efficient CPU, really.

Then I realized this isn't like a netbook at all. It's more like what I think used to be called a "net PC", where you get, basically, a terminal that connects you to the Internet. This means that the real cost of using the computer is $250 plus the cost of extra devices you need, such as a monitor and a keyboard, plus Internet access, plus computation and storage.

I don't think this will fly. You can probably actually save money by buying a netbook, which comes with its own monitor, keyboard, and storage, and thus works with or without Internet access. You would also have your own data near you, instead of under the control of a company that may or may not charge you for it, may or may not provide you access to it tomorrow, and may or may not transfer it to others.

Not that I think the model where you have a dumb terminal and computation and storage happens elsewhere doesn't have its uses. Actually, I think thin clients are a really good idea. But a thin client shouldn't cost as much as $ 250 without monitor and keyboard, and I'm not convinced the world is ready for the computation servers to be on the Internet, not until we can establish more trust in service providers.

No moving parts?

[jknapka]

It uses a Freescale processor that runs Linux and has no moving parts.

Woah, those Freescale people have just blown my mind! Who da thunk I'd see a 100% solid-state CPU in my lifetime?

(Hang on, gotta go shovel some coal into the ol' Pentium...)

The immovable object

[evilviper]

... and has no moving parts.

That's going to make it hard to type...

Re:Don't forget...

[poopdeville]

Y00t!!! You PPPPPPPwned teh other teem

Re:I don't get it, didn't they already make the We

[Lincolnshire Poacher]

>True, the web is much larger now, but I still don't see the point of a web-only machine.

Perhaps you should consider such a machine as a supplement, not a replacement.

I have an old Dell Latitude that I use for checking news and doing basic research on the web. It draws 18W with the battery removed and is used nearly every day.

In the next room is a seldom-used dual-core beastie reserved for file storage and photo processing. It draws about 300W with one disk powered-down.

Different tools for different jobs.

This would be an awesome router; I'd buy it.

[Dr. Spork]

If this thing could be configured as a router, it would be incredibly awesome. Not only would it be far more configurable than the basic router, but it could also be the only computing device in my house that would have to stay on 24/7.

This is because, in addition to router/access-point functions, it could run Bittorrent and ed2k servers in the background, as well as an FTP server and a simple web server for my personal use. This way, I could remotely Wake-On-Lan any computer in my home from anywhere in the world, and transfer files. Right now, because I like using my nighttime bandwidth for uploading to Bittorrent, I leave on a 100+ watt computer all the time. This is very inefficient, and I'd love to offload that function on a 2 watt router device.

2 watts is for CPU only ?

[Zoxed]

According to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR CherryPal uses a Freescale MPC5121e CPU, and this page http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/brochure/FLYMPC5121ECON.pdf (PDF: 154kb) says that it alone uses up to 2 Watts.

It draws more than 2w. Remember USB...

[repvik]

Considering that each USB-port is required to be able to supply 500mA at 5V (2.5W each, two ports, 5W), a 2W figure is plain wrong ;)

Re:It draws more than 2w. Remember USB...

[mr_mischief]

That's not the unit itself using that extra 5 watts, though. It's just a conduit. The USB devices can use that amount or less (or more if they're not bus-powered).

Re:It draws more than 2w. Remember USB...

[repvik]

Of course. But claiming 2 watts power usage is not the whole truth.

Perfect car computer?

[multi-flavor-geek]

Think of this little war-driving monster, pre-loaded with linux, all of your favorite tools on an external hard-drive, along with 200 gig of mp3s, and your off to the races. Just put up a miniature screen where your car stereo was, and roll with it. It is even small enough to fit in the space where you took the old stereo out! If you have one of those cars with the 4" tall stereo in the dash you even have room for the inverter, a small stereo amplifier and the warts in the dash.

Missing the point...

[Anonymous Coward]

The issue here is that the machine can do *most* if not all of what your average joe wants in a computer.
Email, IM, web browsing, music, all in a low-powered device.
2-5W versus 100W+.

"Just Enough" computing was the motto of a similar project I worked on a year or so ago. Unfortunately there were some hardware limitations that really screwed that over. Fortunately all I'd invested was time.
The CherryPal, while being essentially the same hardware I worked with before, has eliminated most if not all the bottlenecks we had before (judging by the system specs).
I'm wary of the whole "cloud" aspect of it, but we'll see how well that works once their "brand angels" start filling the blogosphere. I've spoken to some actually, and I know that they have rather unrealistic expectation of the device. It'll be interesting to hear what they say when they're trying to push it WAY beyond what it was intended to do, and then fail because they don't understand what they're working with.

Re:the cloud

[sexconker]

I think you mean the Information Super Highway.

Low power CPUs SUCK!

[QJimbo]

I tried a Mini-ITX Motherboard with an integrated 1Ghz VIA CPU, and I was astounded at how slow the thing was, it runs about the same speed as an old 266mhz laptop I have! Seriously, these low power cpus leave a lot to be desired. I'll never make that mistake again *points to his Core 2 Quad* ;)

Re:As soon as I can jam BSD on it

[mr_mischief]

A Fit-PC has no Wifi. A CherryPal has only one wired Ethernet port. Both have USB, but I'm not sure what it'd take to get a USB Ethernet adapter running on the embedded Debian CherryPal is pushing.

Re:$250?! Use a PC Engines Alix 1C For the DIY'er.

[mr_mischief]

It's a tradeoff, though. A multicore RISC vs. a single-core CISC of similar clock speed, for one. No Wifi included in your price. IT has nice flexibility, though.

Re:Yes another toy for the coffee shop kids

[mr_mischief]

It supports storage on a USB drive. I'm not sure, but I imagine you'll be able to save to your own servers, too.

Re:Whats the point?

[ksheff]

But wouldn't an old Mac G4 mini be about the same as this thing, except with a hard drive? Small form factor PowerPC machine running an unix derived OS. You're right in that the new Intel based ones would be a better deal though.

Beach House PC

[JohnMosesBrowning]

This actually sounds PERFECT for my beach house. It gives my renters internet access without bringing their own pc, but, minimizes the stuff they can mess up.

Re:I don't get it, didn't they already make the We

[hellwig]

I agree with your point that this could act as a supplement for web browsing and word processing, but the market size for people willing to do that has to be small. I mean, couldn't you use a smart-phone or a PDA for the same purpose? Those devices can't use much more than an average of 2W. I guess the advantage of this device is you can use a full-size key board and display, which BTW, will add significantly to the 2W power draw.

No DVI?!?!?!

[BrunoUsesBBEdit]

This drives me crazy! I have never heard a single valid argument for putting VGA on modern devices. To see my complete explanation or to try arguing pro-VGA, visit: http://www.bronosky.com/?p=54