Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Handheld Computer Is 100% Open Source

Posted by kdawson on from the small-wonder dept.

metasonix writes "While the rest of the industry has been babbling on about the iPad and imitations thereof, Qi Hardware is actually shipping a product that is completely open source and copyleft. Linux News reviews the Ben NanoNote (product page), a handheld computer apparently containing no proprietary technology. It uses a 366 MHz MIPS processor, 32MB RAM, 2 GB flash, a 320x240-pixel color display, and a Qwerty keyboard. No network is built in, though it is said to accept SD-card Wi-Fi or USB Ethernet adapters. Included is a very simple Linux OS based on the OpenWrt distro installed in Linksys routers, with Busybox GUI. It's apparently intended primarily for hardware and software hackers, not as a general-audience handheld. The price is right, though: $99."

39 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. A couple of the potential uses by Pojut · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Emulators, remote desktop control, a nice little side companion for reference while playing Video Games/MMOs, etc...

    --
    Living With a Nerd
    1. Re:A couple of the potential uses by jgagnon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It would be a LOT more useful for remote desktop if it had built-in networking. /sigh

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    2. Re:A couple of the potential uses by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From having done a fair amount of fiddling with the NSLU2(266MHz ARM, 32MB RAM, 8MB onboard flash, 2 USB 2.0 ports(with the ability to hack another couple on) 1 10/100 ethernet) RAM ended up being the big kicker for a lot of applications.

      With USB, you can trivially add terabytes of mass storage(or in the case of this portable, SD cards up to 32 gigs are cheap), and the onboard 8MB is enough for a kernel and initrd; but if you start swapping into a swapfile located on a USB HDD, your performance will tank.

      With a 233MHz ARM, you can run an entire network's worth of services for a smallish household of users(RADIUS server, file server, VPN endpoint, SFTP, mostly-static web server, etc.) for 2-5 people, no problem; but you'll have a harder time doing that in 32MB of RAM, without serious effort that just isn't justified by the cost of 64 or 128MB. Adding a framebuffer to the equation isn't going to help any.

    3. Re:A couple of the potential uses by khellendros1984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The iPad is designed as a mass consumer device. The summary says that they're branding this thing as a kind of hacker/developer toy. For that market, sacrificing some features may be worth it for the openness of the platform...I guess their sales numbers will tell us if that's true or not.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    4. Re:A couple of the potential uses by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have to agree, hell even the price isn't that great, as for the same money you can pick up one of those 7 inch ARM based netbooks off of eBay, and those have Wifi and Ethernet. Just yank the WinCE off and put on Android or your micro distro of choice and you'd have a MUCH better hackable device than these.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re:A couple of the potential uses by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just yank the WinCE off and put on Android or your micro distro of choice and you'd have a MUCH better hackable device than these.

      I think you've greatly underestimated just how difficult that step is...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:A couple of the potential uses by bhtooefr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because the Linux ones are much less available?

      And the Linux ones that are available tend to have crap hardware configurations?

      I know in the US, the Linux ones pretty much disappeared with the move to hard drives. And, 8.9" Aspire Ones with hard drives used a different bottom chassis than the SSD ones.

  2. Open Pandora by kiberovca · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about http://www.open-pandora.org/? It's a much better device than this one, has all of the stuff mentioned, and more.

    --
    Eric: "What're quantum mechanics?"
    Rincewind: "I don't know. People who repair quantums, I suppose."
    1. Re:Open Pandora by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

      Pandora's PowerVR GPU is proprietary.

    2. Re:Open Pandora by FlyingBishop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Pandora hardware is closed once you get to the level of individual chips, though it's not that big a deal for someone trying to build one.

    3. Re:Open Pandora by kiberovca · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So is the MIPS. I'd say there is not so much difference between the two. Yes, the Qi has all of the blueprints, but the Pandora can be actually used for a bit more than just as an example of the open design. I applaud the people behind the Qi, but the device has to be usefull too.

      --
      Eric: "What're quantum mechanics?"
      Rincewind: "I don't know. People who repair quantums, I suppose."
    4. Re:Open Pandora by Dracker · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know a lot about this device. I preordered one Sep. 30, 2008 and am about to receive it as they are finally shipping them.

      There are a few problems with this device for thr purposes of a "100%" open source platform
      -Philosophical: It's not 100% open. There are no blueprints available, and proprietary chips and interfaces (SD card reader, etc) inside. Furthermore, while the OS is open source, some drivers (wifi, analog nubs) are not.
      -Practical: Even though they're finally in production, you'll probably have to wait a year to get yours if you order now. There are no large scale factories assembling them, it's done by the team behind the product (just a few guys) and any volunteers they can muster.

      While an interesting device (and certainly one you can do a lot more with than the Qi) it's not really appropriate for a conversation about available 100% open devices.

    5. Re:Open Pandora by aristotle-dude · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Pandora hardware is closed once you get to the level of individual chips, though it's not that big a deal for someone trying to build one.

      Since when did you or anyone here own a chip foundry? You statement is pure fluff. You are getting sucked in by the word "open". You might not like the whole concept of "profit" but without a profit motive and some semblance of even temporary exclusivity, no competent company will ever develop an innovative product. Hiring real talent requires money and despite what everyone says, most techie people will not produce the same kind of quality on an open source project as they would on a closed source one where they are getting paid a lot of money.

      One of the major downfalls of all of those "open" initiatives is that, once you go beyond basic things like a web browser with an well established UI paradigm or core services, the design by committee effect drags down not only innovation but quality of the end product. Core services tend to work out better because they are usually licensed to be compatible with wide participation from everyone including corporations and are focused on implementing an open standard.

      Ultimately the problem is not about money but rather a herd mentality in open source. With a closed product, the employees have some incentive to come up with the best possible product because bonuses could hinge on good sales and because any team member could get rewarded even more if they came up with a brilliant innovation which set the product apart from the field.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    6. Re:Open Pandora by spazdor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With a closed product, the employees have some incentive to come up with the best possible product because bonuses could hinge on good sales and because any team member could get rewarded even more if they came up with a brilliant innovation which set the product apart from the field.

      Dan Pink says it doesn't work that way:
      http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

      --
      DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
    7. Re:Open Pandora by psbrogna · · Score: 2, Informative

      I disagree with the assumption that only commercial software can innovate. Like Walt Disney "borrowing" fairy tales, commercial software often "borrows" from open source code. For example: ftp, rcp and rsh in Windows originally were ported from BSD. And how about all the hot features from FOSS web browsers being imitated by commercial browsers? Or KDE 4 features finding their way to Vista & W7?

    8. Re:Open Pandora by horza · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You might not like the whole concept of "profit" but without a profit motive and some semblance of even temporary exclusivity, no competent company will ever develop an innovative product.

      That's a bit ironic posting on Slashdot (one of the first public blogs which gave its source away, not initially written for profit), read in a browser (not written for profit), all via the web using HTML over HTTP (again not written for profit). There are plenty of other innovative products not initially written for profit (Napster/Kazaa/BitTorrent spring to mind).

      Hiring real talent requires money and despite what everyone says, most techie people will not produce the same kind of quality on an open source project as they would on a closed source one where they are getting paid a lot of money.

      You are confusing quality with speed of development, and time with money. No matter how good the techie, he still has to put food on the table. If his OS project isn't paying the bills then he has less time he is able to devote to it. You can easily flip the argument around and say an OS project is always going to come up with the best possible product because he has no time limit whereas a commercial product has a deadline to get out of the door. Both arguments are false, as each has its own unique set of constraints.

      One of the major downfalls of all of those "open" initiatives is that, once you go beyond basic things like a web browser with an well established UI paradigm or core services, the design by committee effect drags down not only innovation but quality of the end product.

      I do not believe this to be true. A good leader with a clear vision and realistic project management will lead to a successful end product. Linus Torvalds has managed to create a superior operating system to Microsoft, who employ thousands and pay very well. There are plenty of examples where OS are clear winners and others where proprietary are clear winners (eg Photoshop).

      Ultimately the problem is not about money but rather a herd mentality in open source.

      Oh please, that is nothing to do with open source. Any time there is a successful proprietary product there are always clones. Most of them pretty bad. If you want to look at herd mentality, look at all the proprietary developers flocking to write for the iPhone despite the fact their product may get canned by Apple for absolutely no reason.

      With a closed product, the employees have some incentive to come up with the best possible product because bonuses could hinge on good sales and because any team member could get rewarded even more if they came up with a brilliant innovation which set the product apart from the field.

      I've worked as a programmer most of my life, and I've always had a fixed salary. Share options sometimes, but that's not the same as a bonus. Possibly myself and my colleagues are exceptions, but the biggest motivator for the people we see around us is the risk of getting fired.

      I am not arguing against that money motivates some people, but do not agree with the supposed inherent flaws you see in open source vs closed source.

      Phillip.

      --
      Property for sale in Nice, France
    9. Re:Open Pandora by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nice MBA degree you have there, too bad it's content is based outside of reality.

      Open Source happes everywhere. Even medical fields.

      Places like the Van Andel Institute are working to cure cancer and they attract the top of the crop doctors and researchers.... Not because they pay them insane amounts of money, but because they are working towards a goal that helps humanity.

      In fact everywhere you will find the best of the best doing things for FREE. The ones that dont are never the Best but people who claim they are or try to act like they are.

      Open source built and is running the internet. You think Microsoft would have been able to pull this off all for profit only? not a chance.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    10. Re:Open Pandora by Tacvek · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The idea of the Qi project is to have 100% open hardware, but I agree that not everything is open.
      If it were 100% open hardware the following would need to be met:

      • the Verilog or VHDL for any chips, would be included
      • as would the exact masks used to manufacture the chips, including the memory chips
      • Full specifications sufficient to fabricate the plastic shell, lcd, and any other component used would be included. They must be detailed enough that anybody familiar with fabricating that type of component could theoretically produce an indistinguishable product
      • The PCB files would be included
      • I would permit them to omit including instructions for simple well known components like widely available resistors, capacitors, and even LEDs, as long as the requirements for those parts are sufficiently specified, such as value, tolerance, mounting standard, wattage (for resistor), and information about required shape, and and the specific maximum current, and voltage drop for the LED. (There are for example multiple kinds of green LEDs, which have different voltage drops and current requirements, so they are not all inter-compatible).

      While I'm sure they have included at least some of that, I doubt they have included all of it. Particularly, I find it very hard to believe that instructions sufficient to recreate the LCD were included. I also tend to doubt that semiconductor masks for all used chips were included, even if they included the VHDL/verilog.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    11. Re:Open Pandora by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Funny

      responses, support or di

      Alas, we now know which one you chose.

  3. This story contains one egregious error. by Annirak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    MIPS is not open source. MIPS is a proprietary, licensed technology.

    There are a few OSS processors out there, but they're pretty rare. One example is the xr16.

    1. Re:This story contains one egregious error. by maitas · · Score: 2, Informative

      SPARC T2 has is 100% GPL Verilog.

  4. No Proprietary Technologies? by Revotron · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought the MIPS architecture was a licensed design... surely you can't call something 100% open source if even one component has to be licensed, can you?

    1. Re:No Proprietary Technologies? by tverbeek · · Score: 3, Funny

      Rounding error.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  5. Lemote Yeelong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Lemote Yeelong is also all open-source

      http://www.lemote.com/en/products/Notebook/2010/0310/112.html

    and it has better specs than the Ben NanoNote.

  6. SD card? by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The SD Card Association says:

    If your company is planning to manufacture or have manufactured SD host products (eg. cell phones, cameras or computers) or SD ancillary products (eg. adapters or SD I/O cards), your company is required to:

          1. Join the SD Card Association and
          2. Enter into a Host/Ancillary Product License Agreement (HALA)** with the SD Card Association and the SD-3C, LLC. Latest Revision: December 12, 2009

    I suspect that interface standards are probably the biggest barrier to doing a totally copyleft product. You can't lose them if you want a practical product, and can't keep them if you want complete IP release.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:SD card? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's correct if you us an OMAP based chipset then TI would pick up the cost as part of their cost of production and pass the rest onto the customer.

  7. OSS App Store by Toe,+The · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yeah, but if you want to run anything on it, you have to get approved by the Free Store. The draconian linux overlords will reject anything that isn't 100% free, open, copyleft, and blindingly geeky.

  8. iPad? Really? by TheOV · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think this device deserves to be compared to the "iPad and imitations thereof" - A) it's not a tablet; B) it's far less powerful; C) it doesn't even have any built-in network capability, which is what the iPad and its following are intended for; and D) it's horribly ugly. That being said, it looks like an excellent little device to hack on, and a big bonus is that it has USB ports! I may actually pick one up one of these days.

  9. Ugh by TyroneShoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "While the rest of the industry has been babbling on about the iPad" the geeks have been babbling about any random piece of vaporware that is remotely flat and meant to be touched as the next "killer"

  10. MIPS has a free implementation by tepples · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So is the MIPS.

    The MIPS architecture has a Free implementation called Plasma. The trouble is that the PowerVR GPU is also a trade secret. That said, I do plan on buying a Pandora PDA once they get a couple more batches out; it'll surely be better than Apple's "iDon't touch".

  11. Kindle killer? Not yet but... by JThaddeus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For what I want, this is the right track. I'm not interested in paying several hundred dollars for something that binds me to Amazon or Barnes & Nobel or Apple or whomever. I learned that lesson from having an iPod. It was a generous Christmas gift and I get a lot of use out of it, but managing it in my Linux-only world is a pain. My idea for an e-book reader is something I call Gutenberg friendly: It has what I need to download and display text, HTML, PDF, and Postscript files that I might download from Project Gutenberg or other open sites as well as software manuals. That and a $100 price tag could win me over to the e-book world.

    --
    "Love is a familiar; Love is a devil: there is no evil angel but Love." --William Shakespeare ('Love's Labors Lost')
    1. Re:Kindle killer? Not yet but... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      all of which are 100% useless at reading anything but a epub file.

      PDF on all those suck horribly. so unless you are only using it for casual reading they are useless.

      I've tried all them, they suck. I'm hoping that android will get a decent pdf reader by the time the android based readers come out...

      I dont want to be stuck with my only choice being a n iPad.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Kindle killer? Not yet but... by cdrguru · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I own a Kindle. It is completely unsuitable for displaying PDF documents that have not been customized for the screen dimensions. As is every other eBook reader out there, because you cannot see a full page and there is no good way to zoom and pan quickly. Unless of course you have an LCD display, which then makes it useless for reading other materals.

      Same goes for Postscript - after all, PDF is a subset of Postscript.

      Some eBook readers display a special eBook version of PDF which is designed specifically for Adobe-enabled readers. The page description is thrown out and the text is reformatted to fit the screen. As far as I am concerned, this isn't a PDF anymore. PDF is a page description language where the pages are intended to be rendered as the author intended.

      HTML has a different problem with the Modern Web - games are played to get the page to display in a particular format with the screen width pretty much hard-coded into the page layout. At least a minimum width. For these documents, again a eBook reader is going to fail.

      For all of these what is needed is something that can display an A4 or USA letter size page in a readable manner. Given display costs and yields today, you could probably have that for $500 or a bit more. Anything less than that is going to have an unreadably tiny display forcing you to (slowly) pan and zoom, zoom and pan.

      I keep seeing posts like this, mostly from people that haven't tried to read an 8 inch wide page on a 4 inch wide display. With an eInk display it responds well to turning pages while reading and infuriatingly slowly attempting to move quickly. It doesn't work. Anything where the page is laid out by the author with a fixed idea of how the page should appear isn't going to come out very well without a display capable of handling at least that width, if not that height. Where eBook readers shine is where the "page" is dynamically formatted from unformatted text to fit the display. Just about anything else is a waste of time.

  12. Re:iPad? Really? Mod Parent up by aristotle-dude · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't think this device deserves to be compared to the "iPad and imitations thereof" - A) it's not a tablet; B) it's far less powerful; C) it doesn't even have any built-in network capability, which is what the iPad and its following are intended for; and D) it's horribly ugly. That being said, it looks like an excellent little device to hack on, and a big bonus is that it has USB ports! I may actually pick one up one of these days.

    Agreed. Although I had mod points, I decided to post in agreement instead. This product bares more resemblance to the Atari Profile than it does the iPad. Ok, to be fair, it bares some resemblance to the Toshiba Libretto but the Libretto is probably much more powerful and functional despite being a very old product.

    This product will not sell well. I would be surprised if it even sells 4000 units. I remember everyone hyping up the JooJoo tablet but it only sold 4000 units initially and many of those were returned.

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  13. Proprietary in what way? by tepples · · Score: 3, Interesting

    MIPS is a proprietary, licensed technology.

    A microprocessor can be covered by three different proprietary rights: trademark, mask work, and copyright. Trademark is easy: "The XXX CPU is compatible with a useful subset of MIPS-I user-mode instructions." Mask work is similar to copyright and is worked around in the same way: design your own CPU based on the ISA description rather than copying from a microscopic photo of the existing CPU. As for patents, someone went down the claims in the patents for the MIPS-I architecture and found prior art for 99 percent of them. Hence Plasma.

  14. Free to add repositories by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, but if you want to run anything on it, you have to get approved by the Free Store. The draconian linux overlords will reject anything that isn't 100% free, open, copyleft, and blindingly geeky.

    You've described the policy of the "main" components of Fedora, Debian, and Ubuntu repositories. (For example, see the descriptions of Ubuntu components.) But because the operating system is free, you are free to add additional repositories, such as non-free and contrib (Debian) or restricted and multiverse (Ubuntu). Blocking the user of a consumer product from adding repositories would be tivoization, which GPLv3 prohibits.

  15. When did the MIPS processor become OSS? by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Did I miss that part?

    You can go ahead and mark me as a troll, I am. I never expect any 100% OSS or 100% closed/proprietary device. I care far more about getting a device that does what I want than putting retarded artificial constraints on something in order to stick it to the man or promote an agenda.

    Well, I'll do anything to screw with people who don't make rational decisions.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  16. Zipit Z2 - $50, similar / better specs by X86Daddy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Zipit Z2 is easy to flash with Linux, has a MiniSD slot for additional storage, built in Wifi, Querty backlit keyboard, 320x240 screen, 312MHz ARM chip.

    People making custom distros for it have already managed to cover all aspects of the machine's hardware... lid switch, backlight adjustments, etc... I bought mine on clearance at Target in October, and it's an adequate pocket Linux box for me while I wait for my Pandora. Here's a sampling of what people are doing with it:

    http://zipit.rootnexus.org/
    http://hunterdavis.com/archives/category/zipit-hacking
    http://www.irongeek.com/i.php?page=security/zipit-z2-hacking-userland-side-track
    http://www.karosium.com/2009/07/zipit2-clock-email-twitter-monitor.html
    http://www.openzipit.org/
    http://www.hak5.org/?s=zipit&x=0&y=0

  17. NOT ENOUGH RAM by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Repeated: NOT ENOUGH RAM. I have a Zauraus 3100. It is actually a rather similar machine. 400MHz ARM, 64MB RAM, 32GB flash disk (aftermarket mod), Wifi in the CF slot. Overall rather similar. Naturally a lot more expensive, predating this machine by 5 years, but similar nonetheless.

    Sadly, 64MB RAM is rather low these days. Once upon a time, it could run firefox acceptably, if a little slowly. These days not so much. Sadly more and more websites, especially ones related to signing up for (even free) wifi services seem to be allergic to <a href= and insist on using pointless javascript. This means your choices in browsers is somewhat limited even if you only intend to access rather static content.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.