Comments on: PandaBoard OMAP4 ARM Cortex-A9 development board released for $174

By: bored

bored — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 06:02:00 +0000

I like the way you think. I’m sickened by the alternative architectures dying off (PowerPC in particular) and I hate the way we now have an x86 dominated market. If someone put some real stock into implementing everyday computing on an alternative architecture (instead of adapting x86-intended software to run elsewhere), computing would be interesting again instead of being nothing short of consumer-driven prostitution.

By: ‘In Other Ultra-Mobile News…’ November 5th | UMPCPortal - Handhelds, Tablets, UMPCs and Netbooks

Fri, 05 Nov 2010 06:59:53 +0000

[...] Shared PandaBoard OMAP4 ARM Cortex-A9 development board released for $174. [...]

By: damaged justice

damaged justice — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 12:04:00 +0000

There’s lots of great hardware available. But nobody is putting it together in just the right combination and selling it to the public, because they’re afraid of Microsoft and Intel. THAT’S the issue.

By: Charbax

Charbax — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 00:08:00 +0000

In my opinion the main desktop app that needs to run is the web browser. You don’t think the OMAP4 SoC can connect with fast I/O storing software on faster Nand, ROM and such and that this Pandaboard is more of a Development board that boots the OS on the SD card for easy development? Which of these faster I/O chips are out there or coming soon?

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 23:31:00 +0000

Have you spoken to people who have actually used a full desktop Linux solution and standard applications on these embedded processors? They lock up. Their responsiveness is poor. The experience sucks. Standard desktop applications and the linux userspace desktop stacks are not written to cope with I/O that’s limited to the rate of the SDHC card you have in the slot (even if it is a class 8 or above).

As soon as you try to do anything serious (multi-tasking, big documents, several browser windwos) these SoCs start to fall down because they have no way to move data fast. You can’t replace a desktop with them at this point.

I’m not saying I need Intel. I am saying I need an ARM SoC with proper I/O. Not just embedded device I/O. There are several of these chips out there, or coming soon, but as yet not one consumer device is available with them in. That’s the issue.

By: damaged justice

damaged justice — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:53:00 +0000

Just because it isn’t a gigahertz crotch rocket doesn’t mean it isn’t powerful enough for all but the most demanding applications (read: whiny gamer penis size warriors, along with a few people who actually do real work with that kind of hardware). If someone’s needs don’t go past web browsing, basic multimedia and office applications, there’s no need for a computer they can heat their house with. A full Internet-capable, multitasking operating system can run in 64 KILOBYTES of memory (see Kontiki), and the excuses and rationalizations by the industry and their lapdog apologists have not only long past worn threadbare thin, they’re showing their age and looking as old as they sound.

x86 has done more than anything else to retard computing progress. It needs to die, and the sooner the better.Can you imagine Microsoft ever becoming the dominant operating system without crappy PC hardware (cough *BIOS* cough) underneath? Some of us remember the rich, vibrant and diverse hardware and software culture before the rise of the PC, and eagerly await the day we can dance on the grave of these ridiculously inefficient and half-baked technologies. Thank you so much, Microsoft and Intel, for declaring from on high your godlike proclamation that lo, a netbook shall never have a screen larger than thus inches, or a hard drive larger than thus bytes. And thank you hardware manufacturers for rolling over and whimpering, “Please sir, may I have another?”

By: با پاندابورد نگاهی به آینده بیاندازید - HandheldUsers

با پاندابورد نگاهی به آینده بیاندازید - HandheldUsers — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 06:54:25 +0000

[...] ای مشابه با PC را بدون مشکلات معمول به ارمغان بیاورند منبع __________________ از امتیاز دهی برای تشویق هم فرومی هایتان [...]

By: Les

Les — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:24:00 +0000

Isn’t it just a different point of view, Mike. Obviously, the OMAP4 isn’t competing with the 8 core i7 Extreme, but it is competing with the Atom, which shares the same memory interface (Ti and Intel are both on the MIPI board, so their next generation interfaces may well be the same too). The Atom was always intended as a mobile processor, but Atom based “NetTops” and achieving sales at the lower end of the “desktop” market.

Don’t forget also that the OMAP 4 includes graphics and video on the SOC, so it doesn’t need the same memory bandwidth.

By: Mike Miller

Mike Miller — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:49:00 +0000

Come on.

You wrote: “So this new processor is not only about speeding up Smart Phones, it’s also to start supporting higher resolution larger screen devices and provide ARM Powered full computing as credible challenger to x86.”

Except it obviously isn’t about that. These SoCs have NO useful storage class I/O, so any desktop type experience will be painfully hindered by buffering writes to a slow storage. This processor is not about desktop replacement, and can never be, it’s about embedded mobile devices.

Desktop… Samsung’s Orion, ST’s SPEAr1300 series, perhaps. OMAP? Not with their current supported interfaces…