Slashdot Mirror
100% Free Software Compatible PC Launches
crimperman writes "The Open-PC project has announced that its first PC will be available at the end of February for €359. They claim the mini-ITX desktop machine is energy efficient, consumer ready, easy to upgrade, and — significantly — uses only hardware that has free software drivers available. As you'd expect, it comes with GNU/Linux which is running KDE (a €10 donation to the KDE project in included in the price). Interestingly all the key decisions on design, pricing etc. have been made by the community via online polls. The spec of the machine is pretty reasonable for the price: Atom 1.6GHz dual-core processor, 3GB RAM, 160GB HDD, Intel 950 graphics."
The prices approach the price of Apple hardware. I'd rather get a Mac and run Linux on an open source VM.
950 video at that price why not ion or a real desktop cpu?
I wanted to buy a Free PC, but I couldn't afford it.
But does it run Lin... oh... wait... nevermind.
I can go to Walmart and get a better machine with Windows already on it for half the price.
For the second time I ask, who do I have to suck off to get my shitty product slashvertised?
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
That's about $500 dollars, which is $50 more than I paid for a 16" Asus laptop for my wife for Christmas. Pretty much the same hardware too, other than her laptop came 1 gb more ram, a core2duo processor and a screen. It even uses the same chipset... The laptop came with windows 7 also so you can dualboot whatever flavor of linux you want.
If you want green, this PC uses under 10 watts. I will never want Intel graphics, even if it means not having open source drivers.
How about the BIOS? That's never considered software by the FOSS crowd for some reason.
Or run Linux natively. I have a slightly dated 24" iMac with an ATI Radeon GPU. I ran OS X for a few days and then got frustrated with the limited and over-intrusive UI, and with the tediousness of dealing with the various software ports projects. (The latter aren't awful, and I don't mean to disparage the people working on this, but it's nothing like just having yum or apt-get already there and just waiting to install thousands of excellent free packages.)
So I installed rEFIt, and shrunk OS X down to a tiny partition I never boot into. Instead, I run Fedora 12 with all open source / free software drivers, including sound and 3D-accelerated video. (I think maybe the webcam doesn't work, but I don't really care.) Definitely the nicest Linux workstation I've ever had.
Sure, Microsoft will continue to rake in a fortune selling Windows and Office, but no one really cares about them anymore. It's like IBM still makes excellent money selling mainframes.
Time to move on.
what other company offers a standard warranty three years on parts and labor? [...] that's a computer with an intel atom processor full gig of ram and 100...Gig hard drive. dvd. rom. seventeen inch monitor. For 499
It's like they got William Shatner's brother to do the radio commercial.
Came here to hear somebody moan about the graphics and am leaving satisfied.
No sig today...
the dell studio hybrid is $200 less, has a 2.1GHz core duo processor, and includes MS windows. i am sure there are other examples. really folks if anything this is an anti-linux desktop advertisement.
the nvidia ion? the one with closed-source drivers? ...hmm...
Of course if you look at this from a strict price/performance standpoint, it's not going to win - the point is solid support of the hardware is possible with fully open source code. How does this play out? Hard to say. I'd like to see a review geared to evaluation of points such as stability, responsiveness, usability of major open source programs (Blender, anyone?) and how/whether a fully open driver stack impacts that experience.
Apple wins in the market because they create a smooth, integrated experience that has view technical "gotchas" waiting to pounce on the consumer. The point of projects such as this (IMHO anyway) is to try to achieve something similar with open source - a hardware/software stack that can be tuned for a performance that, while perhaps not the fastest possible, is "smooth".
Realistically, how much horsepower is actually needed for anything not involving heavy duty graphics or video editing? Wouldn't it perhaps be worth trading off a bit of the "latest and greatest" hardware performance for something that was quality components, solid support and would run reliably for a long time? I know I'd be interested.
It'll be interesting to see if they can find a way to illustrate the benefits of such an experience, even if they can create it - and whether the open source audience will be sufficiently impressed to buy it or not. I know that if my machine were to croak tomorrow, I would at least be curious - a Walmart PC or Dell might have better specs for a cheaper price but I'd be scared of component quality and assembly QC - that's one reason folks still build their own boxes, after all. My current machine was assembled from parts years ago, and has been quite reliable (as well as fast enough) through years of building Gentoo updates and other fairly intense desktop tasks - that's what I want for my next machine, because this month's hardware will be slow next month anyway and I want my $$ to last. Is this it? Who knows, but I'd be curious to see what a real in-depth review has to say.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
I really don't see the point of this. Perhaps back in 1998 when it took a lot of effort to get Linux up and running this might have a market, today, I can buy almost any laptop/desktop and install Ubuntu on it with little to no problems. Why should I have to pay $400+ more for a computer that gets me less? For $600 I can get a Core i7 gamer rig and not a crappy "nettop". For $150? I'd buy it in a heartbeat. For $250, I might consider it. For more than the price of a Mac Mini? No way.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
This is great! May not be the end all be all of machines but it is a beginning.
Wow! A $500 Atom based desktop (monitor sold separately)... For reference, bought a $219 Acer netbook, with Windows and a smallish display (hey, it's a netbook). Now that only came with 1 gig of ram, but for $30 I can swap that to 2 gig. Fails worse that Coakley in MA!!!
Brawndo: It's what plants crave!
500 USD - Is that a $300 linux distribution? Does anyone have information on this?
My dual core Acer REVO with 2GB and 320GB HD with wireless keyboard and mouse - not to mention Nvidia ION graphics was $300 brand new on ebay, and i hooked it to my 52" TV for free with the HDMI out. It came with FreeDOS, which is just some non-gui linux, but throw on Ubuntu / Vista / and OSX for the $200 i saved.
"I saved a ton of money on my car insurance by dropping it" ®
Nice idea, and I keep wondering why Ubuntu doesn't do this, in an "it's up to you" option deal how to go about things. Normal distro, then take your chances on whatever hardware you got, or, something they can make money at, a set of a small variety of competitively priced machines-netbook, notebook, desktop, server- that they sell, that their main devs, for at least the long term releases, do absolute testing on so that everything "just works" 100% guaranteed, along with recommended peripherals.
Sort of like the apple model of matched software and hardware, *but* with the distinction of no hissy fits from the company about using other hardware, either. Buy their gear, with their software preinstalled, you get priority warranty and useability support. Buy or build your idea/choice of hardware, you get such support as exists today, which is hit or miss, go lurk on the forum if you have any problems.
Well if satisified because of Intel graphics, then stay tuned!
GMA 950 is really PowerVR! And i'm not a man, i'm really a horse!
It's not 100% free unless the BIOS is Free. ..and if it's not 100%, its not even a novelty, just an expensive lightweight.
This raises an interesting question - whether a PC like this, which purports to use hardware that is fully documented, is sufficiently "free" for every possible scenario. A "more free" approach would be to use "open source hardware" (insofar as is legally possible, I believe things like GPS hardware have disclosure limits imposed by the legal system). By "open source", I'm referring to hardware that includes not only API documentation but hardware descriptions usable for chip production - things like OpenSparc and the OpenGraphics card. I doubt there are enough such pieces to form a fully functional PC (particularly when it comes to things like monitors) but for the sake of argument let's assume there are.
In theory, of course, the fewer restrictions on any IP related to making the computer work the better, but in practice modern PC hardware is not something that can be realistically produced (at least today) by any hobbyist. The physical hardware also doesn't benefit from the "cheap copy" properties of software, so the in-depth knowledge of how to make the hardware is hard to apply even when present. Also, such designs are (to my knowledge without exception, at least in the PC hardware arena) well behind the maximally performing hardware developed in non-open contexts. So the price to pay for full hardware knowledge is quite steep in terms of performance. The only real end-user applicable argument is that full hardware knowledge means the potential for better software support.
So a question for those in the open hardware community - is there potential for driver development using information of the kind available from OpenSparc and OpenGraphics to develop better performing drivers than can be achieved with the information (say) considered sufficient to permit inclusion of hardware in a product like the one in this article? If not, are there any other benefits (aside from the admittedly non-trivial one of being able to learn anything you want to about your computer) to an "open source" hardware platform?
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
(what should be done when the subject-line says it all? the posting software won't allow us either a blank subject-line or blank body. fair enough, i suppose, but what if one's thought is no more than a subject-line in length? well i suppose one could just prattle on about something unrelated, or post one's favorite recipe... Oatmeal-Molasses Chews 1 C butter, softened 1 tsp baking soda 1.5 C brown sugar, packed 1 tsp baking powder 2 large eggs 3 tsp cinnamon 0.5 C molasses 1 tsp allspice 3 tsp vanilla 1 tsp cloves 3 C rolled oats 1 tsp nutmeg 1.5 C white flour 1.25 C raisins 1 C wheat flour 0.75 C walnuts, chopped Beat butter and sugar until creamy. Beat in eggs, molasses and vanilla; add oats. Mix flours and spices in another bowl, then add raisins and nuts, to coat with flour. Add this to sugar mixture. Bake at 375oF 12 minutes, makes about 3 dozen but that seems entirely silly
I guess I'll be the 100th person or so to say that $500 for hardware of this level is a total ripoff. The only thing causing this to cost more than about $175 is the 3GB of memory as machines at that price point have 1GB and a $20 optical drive. Price should be no more than $225.
Thanks for the confirmation.
950 video at that price why not ion
No free software drivers for Ion.
Breakfast served all day!
From the specs:
I was hoping for something energy efficient like the summary claimed.
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
I have to wonder why the 950 rather than something a little newer... My laptop's a year old and has a 4500 MHD, which was equivalent to a low end nVidia or ATI card from a year prior, and can do h264 hardware decoding.
No wireless chipset, of course. Because after 15 years of WiFi being in common usage worldwide, there still isn't a single chipset available with full support for 100% free software. That's just sad.
Anybody who buys this instead of a Mac mini, which does include 802.11b/g/n, gigabit Ethernet, DVD burner and better graphics for virtually the same price, is a fool.
When I saw the blurb, I thought to myself that the BIOS would be the fancy the 'coreboot/LinuxBIOS' stuff. Can't see any mention of it on the Open-PC project website.
Disclaimer: I don't know anything about BIOS other then there is an opensource project about it.
I can get an AMD Athlon X2 Dual-core 2ghz laptop with 4 gigs of ram, a 250 gig hd, AND built-in display, mouse pad, keyboard, hdmi, 4 usb, 8x dvd, gigabit ethernet, b/g/n wireless, webcam, mic, speakers, UPS good for several hours (it IS a laptop), card reader, etc., for less.
And that includes the Microsoft tax (Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit).
Shouldn't a box that isn't a laptop, has lower specs, no battery, no display, less ram, smaller disk capacity on a cheaper hard drive, no webcam, no M$TAX, etc., be CHEAPER?
Nobody's going to buy one of these.
Man, if you're satisfied by people moaning on Slashdot, you must be one happy camper.
Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
1. Most of you conveniently forget that this project is *very* low volume. The price has to be higher.
2. Most of you also conveniently forget the importance of totally GPL-friendly hardware when it comes time to open your wallet.
A friendly reminder that the Trusted Computing Group can lock the user out of their hardware. Now. This is not vaporware. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing_Group
Freedom has a price, and it's costs more than a similarly spec'd Dell/Walmart special.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
It'll be cheaper in the long run, since it barely draws power. I mean, sure, it may take it 4 minutes to launch a browser that would take a normal PC 2 seconds to launch, but you can spend that time thinking of how *green* you're being and how free and liberated your computer is while it breaks a sweat just from booting. You can also take a nap while you tell Gimp to adjust the contrast of a 2-megapixel photo, or spend quality time with your loved ones if you ever try to run Eclipse.
This computer is good for your life. Don't be so obsessed with stats.
Entomologically speaking, the spider is not a bug, it's a feature.
Is GNU/Linux anything like normal Linux?
But in all seriousness, this is a good thing, and the more we encourage hardware vendors to open source their drivers, the better. Closed source drivers lead to nothing but buggy legacy drivers the IT community gets to make work 10 years down the road when the machine meant to last 3 years is forced to last 23.
Motherboard Intel D945GCLF2 with integrated Atom 330 (2 cores, 4 threads) = U$S 103
HD 160 SATA = U$S 53
3 GB of RAM (1 x 2 GB, 1 x 1 GB) = U$S 81
MiniITX Case with 500W PSU = U$S 75
Sub Total: u$s 312
- 10% VAT applied in Argentina already in those prices= -32
Total: u$s 280
OpenPC: u$s 512
Even if you add the price of building it, and a reasonable profit, it's still insanely expensive.
And my hardware choice is actually better, because the motherboard is 100% Intel and not a cheap-ass Asrock.
By chance, I happen to be running that same hardware configuration I just posted. Here's lspci's output:
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 82945G/GZ/P/PL Memory Controller Hub (rev 02)
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 02)
00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) High Definition Audio Controller (rev 01)
00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) PCI Express Port 1 (rev 01)
00:1c.2 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) PCI Express Port 3 (rev 01)
00:1c.3 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) PCI Express Port 4 (rev 01)
00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB UHCI Controller #1 (rev 01)
00:1d.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB UHCI Controller #2 (rev 01)
00:1d.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB UHCI Controller #3 (rev 01)
00:1d.3 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB UHCI Controller #4 (rev 01)
00:1d.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller (rev 01)
00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation 82801 PCI Bridge (rev e1)
00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation 82801GB/GR (ICH7 Family) LPC Interface Bridge (rev 01)
00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) IDE Controller (rev 01)
00:1f.2 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801GB/GR/GH (ICH7 Family) SATA IDE Controller (rev 01)
00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) SMBus Controller (rev 01)
01:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 02)
04:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL-8185 IEEE 802.11a/b/g Wireless LAN Controller (rev 20)
And extract from cpuinfo (There are actually 2 cores with 2 threads each, which shows up as 4 processors on GNU/Linux)
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 28
model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 330 @ 1.60GHz
stepping : 2
cpu MHz : 1596.098
cache size : 512 K
BTW: This hardware is 100% Hackintosh friendly. I am dual booting Ubuntu and OSX on it.
* Those are prices in Argentina (Yes, electronics here are way more expensive than elsewhere), and they include a 10.5% VAT, so that price would actually be ~280U$S. And the components are better, and still 100% Free. Except off course both this system and their system contains privative hardware design, privative BIOS and firmware, etc. So, not really 100% open.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Purchasing a non-Windows system on an Atom makes no sense at all. The only current use for an Atom is to run Windows. If you are going to run a non-Windows (free software, open source) system you should be looking at ARM based systems. Part of being an informed consumer is recognizing monopolies (both software and hardware) and making purchasing decisions that do not promote said monopolies. I'll bet any surveys did not include a choice of hardware (and one has to wonder how/why KDE got selected given that there are 3+ other window managers available under Linux -- most of which have a much smaller footprint).
You are not same. You are *happy campers*, but already you know.
I was going to post something along the lines of "Oh noes, EPIC FAIL, Intel gfx means I can't run Lucid Lynx!!!11"
Then I realized that, not having RTFA, it would be safer to post this disclaimed version of the same complaint in case it shipped with Ubuntu or something, so as not to look stupid.
Did it work?
So, design by committee is okay when open components are involved?
[Slashdot Comments We Liked]
Indeed. Intel graphics are useless for nearly every use. Even if you don't do 3d - 2d window drawing and other operations seem to cause X to use a lot of CPU for some reason. This only happens with intel.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
This computer is good for your life. Don't be so obsessed with stats.
So if they stick an apple logo on it and jack up the price a bit more, it'll sell like hotcakes?
I kid, I kid.
I think the success of this machine will be decided by marketing.
If the company is aiming at the techy types, this is a big fail. Most of us already know how to build something like this. The only advantage they have is buying power as it applies to component acquisition.
Now, on the other hand, if they are aiming at Governments/Corporations, such as the ones that are telling their citizens/employees to stop using Microsoft products due to security flaws, then I think they might be in for more then most of you give them credit.
The big question is how well these things play with others. Do they work well in such large-scale networked environments? Can someone order 500 of them, network them and get down to business?
This will fall flat on it's ass just like every other open endeavour. Reason? Hard to make money when your target market is a bunch of freeloaders with fake principles.
950 video at that price why not ion or a real desktop cpu?
"Interestingly all the key decisions on design, pricing etc. have been made by the community via online polls." What "community"? Sounds like a bunch of idiots trying to line their pockets with money people throw away "for the greater good". It's a scam.
Where is the microcode for the peripherals?
What about the maintainability of the source? Even free software is "proprietary" if you need a proprietary manual to make heads or tails of the driver code.
Free Software is a good thing, no doubt, but please don't kid yourself into thinking that there is some extra benefit to a machine where you can download the source code to the OS and the drivers. Your computer is STILL VERY PROPRIETARY and there are lots of things going on in there over which you still have no control.
Ok, I guess I can live with Intel graphics (I don't play 3D games neither use fancy desktop effects).
But for that price...
Atom processor? I didn't know that using Linux meant you were a masochist.
Yeah, I know Linux can be quite fast but, honestly, there are much better low-consumption processors there. That's a desktop, not a netbook with battery concerns.
Even the most hardcore shell-only unix guy loves to issue a "make -j 4" and see all the cores working at full load and, soon after, work done.
3GB ram... Why 3GB? Why not 4GB? This is not a PC meant for Windows, that 3GB limit means nothing to Linux even in 32bit versions (yeah yeah, I'm aware of PAE limitations).
160GB HD. That's must be a joke. You only pick such HD when you want to save pennies in order to build the absolutely cheapest desktop.
"250watt power supply". I'm interested to know about the power efficiency of that power supply! You guys put an ATOM as processor, what is pointless unless you put a really, really efficient power supply.
Aaarrrgh...
The firmware for wireless cards is a proprietary binary blob for which the source code is not available.
This shoots down the "100% Free Software" concept.
While I applaud the decision to focus on hardware which is Open Source friendly, this isn't exactly rocket science. Linux has matured to the point where odds are pretty good that any given system will function "out of the box", without resorting to proprietary drivers.
Full hardware acceleration on newer GPUs can still be problematic, of course. The Intel 950 -- while it is in fact relatively new -- isn't particularly current in terms of features or performance. So effectively we're still in a situation where we're settling for second-rate GPU performance, just to avoid the need for proprietary drivers. AMD/ATI's push to work more closely with the Open Source community is starting to bear fruit; I'm hopeful that we'll see better support for current GPUs going forward.
All the good folk who are say they can "get a better machine, for less, and it's even got Windoze installed!" just totally miss the point.
There are many people out there like me who'd happily pay EXTRA to get a machine that is completely free of Micro$oft or Apple, and doesn't count as a sale for either of them. I will not contribute to either of these organisations in any way.
Sorry, but for this price, I wouldn't get it. I bought a Notebook with Athlon X 2400+ and Radeon Mobility 3400HD for 400$ just six months ago. Why should I pay 360$ for an Intel Atom and that 950 crap?
I hoped they build some kind of real good PC, with a real CPU and not such a shitty thing like an Atom CPU. Same for the GPU.
(I think maybe the webcam doesn't work, but I don't really care.)
Sorry if this is a little off-topic, but THIS is my biggest problem with both Linux and Linux fanboys (I'm not necessary saying you're the latter; you just caused me to think of it). Core functionality is relatively easy to get, sure, even if it occasionally takes more work than a Windows user like myself is accustomed to. However, it's all the boundary cases that keep Linux from being mainstream: certain drivers not existing, certain hardware not being supported, poor excuses for replacements of legitimate products (OpenOffice versus Microsoft Office, for example), etc.
I've tried hard for two years to like Linux (I installed Ubuntu on two computers during that time and used it reasonably frequently), and it just never happened. But the absolute worst part of all of this is how Linux users often say that people should switch over to their OS because it's free, there aren't any viruses, and everything works just fine. However, they neglect to mention how much work and inside knowledge is required to make everything work, and when people point out things that just work better on a different OS (or work at all, period), they say "well I don't really care about that, so it doesn't matter." I've got news for all of you: we like our OSes because they're simple and functional, with no headaches involved. Maybe if the Linux community started caring when things didn't work, their OS might actually have a shot at competing with the other two.
Real Linux Users build their own computers!
Predicted Reply:
"We used to compute with 5 ton stones and dead penguins, now get of my lawn!"
Assuming even that the 359 includes some sales tax (that depends from which country these guys plan to sell it):
http://geizhals.at/eu/a401398.html 339 for an Packard Bell iMedia D4500, Phenom X4 9100e 4x 1.80GHz, 3072MB, 320GB, Windows Vista Home Premium (PB80X37003)
http://geizhals.at/eu/a475774.html 349 for an Acer with 4GB/320GB DualAtom. Funnily even a Win7 license is included.
http://geizhals.at/a468358.html admittingly only 2GB RAM, but a Pentium Dual Core and only 293
http://geizhals.at/?cat=syscpq&bpmax=359&v=e&plz=&dist=&sort=p HP offers at this price point even Quad Opterons (admittingly with 1GB RAM)
http://geizhals.at/eu/?cat=syslenovo&bpmax=359&v=e&plz=&dist=&sort=p&xf=445_2048 Levono does have a number of boxes too
Nothing reasonable priced about this offer, sorry. You can get a multiple of processing power for that money; or more storage and memory even for a DualAtom with a branded product. (And I'd argue that it's still cheaper, because you do get that Win7 license, even if you don't need it.)
And while not all of these PCs are automatically perfectly Linux compatible, some are for sure, e.g. Atom based designs have usually mostly Linux friendly hardware.
Indeed. Intel graphics are useless for nearly every use.
Only if you define "useless == not the best".
They're mostly completely acceptable for all "normal" desktop use, including non-gaming non-professional 3D. Stuff like compiz works just fine with Intel graphics, even if processor is just Atom.
And in the context of Linux and Free Open Source drivers, they're simply the best.
Please don't confuse American prices with European prices. €359 is very reasonable over here - you won't find a laptop for that price over here either. The laptop you describe would be €600 if you're willing to stand in line at 8AM.
Remember, we pay around 20% in sales tax.
I'm guessing:
a) The people who buy this won't be gamers (not everybody's first thought when evaluating a PC is "what's the 3DMark score?")
b) The 950 is a good buy right now and is tried/tested in the open source driver world.
No sig today...
Atom?
KDE4?
Atom?
KDE4? ...
how?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Converting Euros to dollars using current exchange rate isn't going to work out too well. PC's are always cheaper in the USA and the dollar is in a bottomless pit right now.
You need to calculate how many Big Macs it works out to and compare prices that way.
No sig today...
Some people pay more for Macs - because they see value somewhere.
Some people will pay extra to drive a Toyota Prius - because they're idiots.
Some people will pay more for "open" computing - for the same reasons.
No sig today...
Nothing new. Nearly all new PCs come with splashtop anyway.
It's a nice idea and Linux is good, however that PC is not endorsed by gnu so why tag this story gnu???
If you have a conscience about how patent trolls are destroying software development, tell them you just want the machine and not openSuSe because Novell are bedfellows with Microsoft.
The donation to the kde project should be more like fifty euros.
Did you not read my post? I have had nothing but poor performance EVEN DRAWING A WINDOW.
Yea, when you get a slideshow when you scroll an email down... yea, that's "mostly completely acceptable for all 'normal' desktop use".
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Erm. Yes, I made sure compositing and such was off.
It's most noticeable with Firefox and Thunderbird, but it terminals... you can actually watch the windows redraw when they change.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
I'm still waiting to people moan about the KDE tax.
why the fuck should I give money to KDE? i have never contributed with money to ANY open source project.
I contribute with code, bug reports, helping the community. And that's it.
Open source is only useful because we don't have money thirsty 'execs'. and that's why mozilla is not improving at the peace it should.
Also, I will probably use Ion or Gnome, so why should i pay a KDE tax? Let's pay the windows tax as well.
For the same price, I can run a beowulf cluster of netbooks?
The open source drivers available for both ATI and NVIDIA suck bad enough that you may as well have an 950. Both ATI's and NVIDIA's open source drivers are barely 3D capable. If that doesn't bother you (eg. you only open office, firefox, etc), a 950 will do just as well.
If you want reasonable 3D support (you play games or do serious workstation graphics) then you're talking closed source NVIDIA. (ATI's blob will do if you don't mind frequent artifacting, lockups, and lagging support for new kernels, xorgs releases, and new hardware.)
ATI's open drivers are getting there (maybe by 2015?) and Nouveau is neat. I hope they keep plugging away, but there really is only ONE 3D solution for Linux right now and it happens to be closed source. :(
As everyone's being so negative about this, I thought I'd throw in my 2c.
I quite like this idea, in fact I may well buy one. I'd never heard of it before today.
Reasons I'd buy it:
1. Form factor is neat and a sensible design (I'm tired of my big old clunky PC box taking up a lot of space).
2. I only use Linux, and the fact that someone's gone to the effort of ensuring everything will work for me is great. No hassle searching the net trying to work out which hardware to buy. I'm busy and this saves me time.
3. The price point is good. Macs might offer you a better price/performance ratio - but I don't care. I want something that is sufficient at a low price. This is 190 euros cheaper than a Mac Mini, so that is 190 euros saved. I don't care if it could have been more powerful for just a bit more cash. I also know exactly what hardware is in it, and it's been chosen by people thinking about more than margins (unlike Apple, who anecdotally at least seem to be very good at choosing hardware that breaks frequently).
4. I like the idea of the project and the fact that it gives money to the open source community.
My main criticism is that the hard disk size is a little small.
RS
...someone has put a price on fail! 359 Euros per unit of fail, get yours NOW!
Its weird how so much support is going towards the mac, that no one appreciates the simplicity of the laptop for what it is.
Its power efficient, and cheap.
And let me go into a bit more detail. The intel atom is a cpu designed by intel to run on as little power as possible.
The core 2 duo was not. It has power saving features, but its not designed with power being a primary factor.
The same things can be said for the chipsets.
I was unable to an exact comparison between the 2 chipsets since the details, but toms hardware did a match thats close enough.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-ion-atom,2153-10.html
The result is that the 945GC is up to 35% more power efficient. I expect its the same case with the intel core 2 duo vs the atom, if not, even more in favour.
The fact is that's a huge saving on power. Using the atom and 950gc you could get 3 hours batter life where the other only gets 2.
And laptops are meant to be portable. Anyone whos takes a laptop around with them, is well aware of the power concerns. That 1 hour can be the difference between moving with the laptop freely, and having to bring a power adapter and sit with it rooted to a power socket.
As i'm typing this post out, its on an atom netbook, its power consumption so low that its passively cooled. Try that with a core 2 duo and its matching gpu.
A few other things i'll touch on.
Its stupid to point out that for only 190 more euro you get a more powerful computer. But that's 50% more expensive then this laptop offering!
More memory isn't necessarily a good thing. At least on windows i can enter or leave hibernation mode in 26 seconds because i use 1gig of memory. If i had 3 gigs, it'd jump to about 45 seconds both ways. as well as draining more power, and increasing the price needlessly.
Its not a Mac. Seriously. Comparing Linux to mac, and talking about the mac favorably... I have to wonder where slashdot's culture is headed on threads like these.
If you want a top of the line gaming laptop, so be it. Just don't snub laptops that are aimed at a cheaper/work environment because it doesn't suit you.
To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
Or you have the internet.
Not quite "that" system, but a quick search gives me for example this:
http://geizhals.eu/a450039.html for less (samsung dual core 2, 3GB ram, 15.6" screen, 356)
The only thing is the 4GB ram. If you are happy with 2GB, you get laptops starting from 300. All having "microsoft tax" and dual core core 2...
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
I'd rather have something like an asrock ion 330. Just as green, better, cheaper. http://www.asrock.com/nettop/index.asp
"laptop with 4 gigs of ram, a 250 gig hd, AND built-in display,"
It's a fucking LAPTOP, it BETTER have a built-in display.
"Shouldn't a box that isn't a laptop, has lower specs, no battery, no display, less ram, smaller disk capacity on a cheaper hard drive, no webcam, no M$TAX, etc., be CHEAPER? "
No, because the money spent miniaturizing the components into a single form factor isn't there.
Ever spend time doing R&D? I'm neck-deep in it right now. You'd be amazed at what little things can do to severely inflate cost, literally.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
My Asus eee netbook meets most of these specs, cost me $290 and I can carry it with me.
or - http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2032280010%201141843301%201143618759&ShowDeactivatedMark=False
Sure, moan about the < 3GB of memory, but here are two points that will change that. 1. They start at a bit under half the price. 2. If you are running an Atom processor, most of what you will be doing won't need 3GB of memory...especially with Linux.
Make America grate again!
Except that this thing is so horribly underpowered that it's a waste of 10 watts. There's a difference between green and usable and just plain green.
If I really wanted to play around with something green and still usable in niche jobs, I'd just get a SheevaPlug. They draw even less power and also cost about a 5th of the price of this.
GMA 950 is barely (just barely) usable for regular 2D tasks. As someone above said, the damned thing is so slow you can see windows redraw on X. So you may as well at least get a chip that can handle 2D. A motherboard with a nVidia 9300 embedded should not be too hard to find for a similar price. Like you said -- there are drivers for it as well that are open, even if they can't handle 3D.
I mean, sure, it may take it 4 minutes to launch a browser that would take a normal PC 2 seconds to launch
you have PC that lauches a browser in 2 seconds? Wow, where can I get one of these super-computers. FF on my 3x core AMD takes ...well, longer than that. Even IE takes longer, but that's cached at startup to pretend its slim and fast.
Yeah, but my point is - most computing tasks nowadays require feeble CPU, its IO that is the bottleneck - reading all that bloated code into RAM for example. So as long as you don't use CPU-intensive tasks (like video/photo editing) then a simpler CPU is more than sufficient, and that's also a trend i'd like encouraged simply because if software developers are reminded that code still needs to be efficient and performant even under low-power CPUs, they will develop such code. if they think that everyone has 20Gb RAM and a 50-core 12Ghz CPU, they'll develop code that requires such a beast.
Rule 34 invoked.
Was McCain on the ballot? No. A conservative Republican swept in and took the Senate seat previously held by Ted Kennedy. MA voters are typically so liberal that they voted a drunken murderer into office - repeatedly! But their revulsion for the way the Progressives are running things is so powerful that they must've had a "Holy shit what have we done?" moment after voting for Obongo and seeing that the only change he brought was a feckless foreign policy and a health care bill crafted solely by lobbyists in back-room deals.
Man, if you're satisfied by people moaning on Slashdot, you must be one happy camper.
Happy? I just had an orgasm!
significantly — uses only hardware that has free software drivers available.
Oh, unlike my sony vaio running Linux mint ...with drivers that i've never paid a cent for ...hence free.
Maybe try this....only using hardware that has OPEN SOURCE drivers.
these misuses of terminology...go back to grammar school.
You must have driver issues, the GMA 950 runs X slick with compositite an every thing on. If its that slow you have a serious software version or configuration problem.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
From the "specifications" page at the link:
Only components with complete technical specifications, as provided by the manufacturers, were used.
So where are the schematics, PC board artwork, parts lists, mechanical drawings of the chassis and brackets, etc.?
Not to mention the fact that the chip designs are copyrighted by Intel...
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
Yeah, I went through that. You're missing the steps about digging out your install CDs and finding the Xcode Developer Tools, and X11. I can do all that, but like I said, it's extra steps First I installed Fink, because I'd heard good things, and then realized that they only had an old version of Inkscape. Then I installed MacPorts, and ran into some other frustration. Then I thought, why am I jumping through all these hoops anyway? I could just have the real thing.
I had a similar problem with the 27" iMac (ATI Radeon 4850). The fix is actually pretty simple. You just have to delete the vendor specific drivers related to your card so that it gets the generic vga driver instead. After your install is complete you can download and install whatever vendor drivers you need.
I accomplished this in OS X by using NTFS-3G and MacFuse, but you can also just boot into a safe mode command prompt and delete the necessary ATI*.sys drivers from %windir%\system32\drivers (or whatever specific hardware drivers you need to delete).
As to ease of installation, I would say Linux has made huge strides in catching up with the others. The actual install itself is relatively easy, although I would say that OS X and Windows still edges it out, if only barely. Post install, it easily trounces Windows for post install driver support for things like wireless cards and whatnot. The drawback on Linux is if you get into an unknown or unusual hardware configuration, brace yourself, because your about to get a hard lesson in Linux ;)
OS X has an advantage here since it uses a closed system, it doesn't typically have to deal with hardware surprises. Of the three, I liked the OS X install the best, followed closely by Windows 7, and then even closer by Linux. This is a huge win for OSS, as it shows what dedication and the love of something can do, without the incentive of money.
Only uses hardware that has FREE drivers...
as opposed to my SONY VAIO running Linux Mint with ToTally FREE drivers. Yep, never paid a cent for those babies. I guess I must of stole em.
How about trying only uses hardware that has OPEN Source drivers? AH YES, much better.
Fail on the slashvertissement, fail on the grammar, fail on correct use of terminology. EPIC FAIL.
However, it does not have the user friendless of windows or mac.
On the contrary, Linux is far, far more user-friendly than MS Windows or Mac OS. You're mistaking having a short, low learning curve for being user-friendly.
Linux does what I tell it to do, and if it doesn't know how to do something, it's much easier for me -- the user -- to teach it what I want. I definitely agree that it takes more investment to get to that point. If you're interested in learning, it's worth it -- not because it's free or virus-safe or whatever, but precisely because it's more user-friendly.
I'm not certain "sensors" works on the ASrock this mentions. I do have to wonder if they tried hard enough!
Atom board. You get a 950, a 500 (PowerVR SGX-530...), or an ION on pretty much all the Atom motherboards. Most of them also don't have a PCI-E slot so you can't boost your GPU there.
I mean an Intel GMA 4500 MHD (X4500 HD for desktops). Both the tech specs and Linux drivers are freely available. I got it because I needed h264 decoding and prefer open spec. 3D performance is good enough for circa 2005 games.
It's a good feeling isn't it? I recently had a toilet installed that uses 1/3 less water than my original. And even though I have to take the time now to flush twice instead of once to get it to work, it's worth the extra time to know that I'm helping the environment.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Comes exhibit 3020 (PDF):
I'd rather financially support the paradigm shift, personally.
PS: My original v1.0 US model Prius is now worth more than I paid for it.
> Did you not read my post? I have had nothing but poor performance EVEN DRAWING A WINDOW.
Nonsense. I previously used the 950 as my main HTPC platform. It was perfectly acceptable. It beat ATI gear with proprietary drivers.
If not for the Hauppauge 1212 spitting out 1080p h264 files, I would still be using it.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The machine you link to doesn't come with RAM or HD. The box in question does. Let's add RAM and HD pricing onto this, shall we?
4GB of RAM - 92.03 euros, not including shipping, but including VAT.
160Gb HD - 34.08 euros, not including shipping, but including VAT.
Doesn't really look any cheaper, now does it?
Now, a discussion of whether or not you got more bang for your buck is in order- and to whit, you'd be right. But you missed the point of the machine
(Your Ion 330 requires NVidia supplied drivers whether you're using Linux or Windows. They're not FOSS drivers...) and the only real advantage you
would have over the other machine is 1extra GB of RAM and a considerably faster GPU. But since the CPU is weak in comparison to other
configurations, you're not overly likely to be playing games on it any more than you would with the OpenPC. Any ability to play HD would come
from playback engines that would run against the unified shader engines in the 9400 on the Ion 330, which are, at best, embryonic right at the moment.
All in all, you bought a machine for slightly more money that's able to marginally get a whiff of gaming and that's about it
right at the moment.
if you want linux pre-installed, there are a number of options for linux-only vendors. I've had good experiences with System76, and heard good things about ZaReason. Of corse, you could pay the MS Tax on you hardware, but these two are pretty competitive, and you get Linux support and (to the extent they control it) hardware that was designed for Linux (a big deal for suspend/resume and making hardware Just Work, until vendors can stop cutting corners (e.g. broken DSDTs, see problems with Microsoft's compiler (which is pretty much the only one in use, except sometimes when Linux is pre-installed) and the recent foxconn debacle) and working around bugs in their windows-only drivers!) So basically, Linux-supporting hardware is less hassle, full vendor support, and fairly comparably priced.
--
Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
Two issues. #1 Intel Atom? How is that open? How about opensparc? #2, no obvious way to /purchase/ the damn thing on their website. Waste of time.
The machine you link to doesn't come with RAM or HD. The box in question does.
Yes it does. 320GB 2.5" HDD and 2GB DDR2.
Click Product Specification in the link I posted.
But you missed the point of the machine
I didn't miss the point, I just feel it may be ever so slightly overpriced.
Sadly with the 945GC chipset you are not even using less power. A cheap AMD machine on a 760G motherboard runs at less than 30 watts, while some of these 945GC atom boards idle in the 30-35 watt area. I agree on the family time, though. The a Regor build might keep you too busy. This is one of the Atom's "features".
Didn't AMD open all their specs? Surely at that price they could get one of the lower end Radeon chips and still be plenty "green". I wouldn't wish Intel IGP on anybody for any reason. They are slow, sluggish crap that frankly even suck at basic windows drawing, much less for video. Maybe it is just me, but this seems like a way to sell some horribly underpowered hardware for crazy money by sticking the "free" label on it.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Come off it - they could have just shoved an off-the-shelf laptop motherboard in it - no "miniaturization" necessary. Ditto any optical drive, hard drive, etc.
People aren't going to buy a MUCH lower-spec desktop - which they still need to supply the screen, webcam, mic, keyboard, mouse, wireless adapter (heck, even the Wii does wireless Internet) for more than a much better laptop just because it's "free". There's no market for this stupidity.
This is a nice idea, but it seems lacking. No DVI port? That one is pretty important to me. Also is highly priced, although maybe not for being mini ITX.
I would have been a lot more impressed if the specifications page was more in depth and it actually came with Coreboot and a DVI port. I've heard lots of bad things about Atom processors, too.
Nice job to them though.
That's not canonical/ubuntu though is it? Dell offers some models with ubuntu as well, but it isn't the same. I was meaning that *they* would do it, expand from just software to an integrated hardware/software/peripherals stack, which would give them a guaranteed "just works" offer for people, to help make them cash. Not really sure how large that market is, but I would bet it would be much better than zero. I *think* it would probably do pretty well.
I know all sorts of smaller systems builders do it, offer linux preinstalled, but Canonical might have the juice and cash to go upscale a little more, get economies of scale deals, keep the prices *really* competitive. Like I said, pull an Apple with the integration, but not be dickheads about people running software on "unauthorized" hardware like Apple does.
This is not a problem with the GMA 950; it is an X/driver problem. Some driver/kernel/X server/library combinations resulted in acceleration not working; I don't remember the details. This is partly the fault of the distributors who shipped these combinations without adequately testing them on what is one of the most popular GPUs. (Problems like this have led me to avoid OpenSUSE, Fedora, and non-LTS Ubuntu, and keep me from even considering using Linux on the desktop.)
Intel graphics work fine in Mac OS X or Windows, even on the GMA 950 and even with desktop compositing.
iirc, there are no mini-itx sized motherboard with amd/ati chipsets.
plenty of larger ones tho...
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
probably because anything more recent uses powervr based graphics that are locked behind IP legislation.
comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
Who charges for software drivers? :^)
Agreed. The Win 7 install was easy. [64bit Ult]
And aside from me having to dig around and find drivers, Win would pop up and say "Hey, you got the blah-blah graphics card. There's a new driver for that. Do you want me to get it, and install it?"
Except that the OpenPC's Atom N330 is a dual core, 64-bit, processor. The C2D is faster, though. Both are capable of virtualization (virtualization predates the VT extensions), but the Atom N330 doesn't support Intel's VT extensions.
Both are dual core, x86-64 processors; the Atom N330 supports hyperthreading, the C2D doesn't. There are probably some scenarios in which the C2D's higher frequency and other advantages don't outweigh the Atom's hyperthreading advantage and/or the OpenPC's RAM advantage (more RAM often equating to less need to hit slower disk.)