Posts Tagged ‘Linux’

A tiny PC that runs Linux and Android 4.0 — and costs just $74

May 22nd, 2012

Over the past few months there have been no fewer than three tiny, cheap Linux PCs making headlines, and now there’s a fourth to add to the list.

First we saw the Raspberry Pi and the Cotton Candy devices emerge; then, almost exactly a month ago I wrote about the Mele A1000, a small ARM device that sells with Android but can be configured to run Ubuntu Linux as well.

The latest to appear? None other than the MK802 micro-PC, a USB-sized device priced at $74 that runs Android 4.0 and Linux.

This is turning into a veritable smorgasbord of choices, and I believe it’s just the beginning of a real revolution in computing.
1080p HDMI Video Output

Featuring a single-core 1.5GHz AllWinner A10 Cortex A8 ARM processor, Android 4.0, 512MB of DDR3 high-capacity memory, and WiFi connectivity, the MK802 is now available on Aliexpress for $74 including free shipping to the United States via China Post.

With a MALI400 graphics processing unit, the device from Chinese brand rikomagic features 4GB Flash storage, a microSD slot, and two USB ports: one full-sized and one micro, according to CNXSoft. Video output is via 1080p HDMI — an HDMI cable needs to be added separately — and users can tap either an Android virtual keyboard or add a wireless mouse and keyboard.

Perhaps best of all is that users can run Ubuntu, Debian, or another Linux distribution of their choice via microSD card.
A New Category of PC

It’s true that this device is more expensive than the $35 Raspberry Pi, but it’s also cheaper than the $199 Cotton Candy. It’s very comparable to the $70 Mele 1000.

The bottom line, though, is that this is yet another choice for those seeking a low-cost computing option, and once again it’s powered by ARM and Linux — both the Android variety and more traditional forms, if so desired.

There will surely continue to be a place for the many high-priced computing options in this world, but it’s endlessly exciting to imagine what new innovations these tiny, cheap, Linux PCs will enable.

Source:http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9227329/A_tiny_PC_that_runs_Linux_and_Android_4.0_and_costs_just_74?taxonomyId=89

ARM Arrives – Calxeda Shows Real Hardware Running Linux

May 9th, 2012

I said last year that this would happen sometime in the first half of this year, but for some reason my colleagues and clients have kept asking me exactly when we would see a real ARM server running a real OS. How about now?

To copy from Calxeda’s most recent blog post:

“This week, Calxeda is showing a live Calxeda cluster running Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on real EnergyCore hardware at the Ubuntu Developer and Cloud Summit events in Oakland, CA. … This is the real deal; quad-core, w/ 4MB cache, secure management engine, and Calxeda’s fabric all up and running.”

This is a significant milestone for many reasons. It proves that Calxeda can indeed deliver a working server based on its scalable fabric architecture, although the chances of HP signing up as a partner meant that this was essentially a non-issue, but still, proof is good. It also establishes that at least one Linux distribution provider, in this case Ubuntu, is willing to provide a real supported distribution. My guess is that Red Hat and Centos will jump on the bus fairly soon as well.

Most importantly, we can get on with the important work of characterizing real benchmarks on real systems with real OS support. HP’s discovery centers will certainly play a part in this process as well, and I am willing to bet that by the end of the summer we will have some compelling data on whether the ARM server will deliver on its performance and energy efficiency promises. It’s not a slam dunk guaranteed win – Intel has been steadily ratcheting up its energy efficiency, and the latest generation of x86 server from HP, IBM, Dell, and others show promise of much better throughput per watt than their predecessors. Add to that the demonstration of a Xeon-based system by Sea Micro (ironically now owned by AMD) that delivered Xeon CPUs at a 10 W per CPU power overhead, an unheard of efficiency.

But this kind of competition is what drives the technology business, and the outcome of this skirmish will in the end benefit anyone who needs a server in the coming years with increased options and continued pressure on incumbents to do better.

Hats off to the Calxeda team for a major milestone.

I’m interested in hearing from anyone with strong opinions pro or con — would you consider an ARM server? If so, for what workloads?

Source:http://www.zdnet.com/blog/forrester/arm-arrives-calxeda-shows-real-hardware-running-linux/865

New Dell Ubuntu ultrabooks a step in the right direction for Linux support

May 9th, 2012

Dell has launched an experimental project called Sputnik to produce a Linux laptop that is tailored to meet the needs of software developers. The first stage of the project is a six-month exploratory effort that will pair Dell’s XPS13 Ultrabook with Ubuntu 12.04.

Dell’s Barton George, who described the concept this week in a blog post, hinted at the potential for a more ambitious follow-up effort if the initial experiment succeeds. Dell’s previous Linux efforts have had mixed results. The company first began to offer Ubuntu on desktop and laptop computers in 2007 after open source advocates used Dell’s IdeaStorm website to campaign for Linux preinstallation options.

The availability of Ubuntu-enabled hardware models from Dell has been spotty over the years. The dell.com/ubuntu landing page on Dell’s website often indicates that no products are available with Linux preinstalled, which was the case for most of the past year. At present, Dell is only offering two low-end Vostro models with Ubuntu to consumers in the US. Dell’s Ubuntu machines have reportedly fared better in China, where Dell has made an effort to give the Linux platform a retail presence.

Dell has also previously dabbled with Ubuntu developer machines. When it offered a Mini 10v with an incomplete build of the Ubuntu Moblin Remix in 2009, the company characterized it as an offering for developers and early adopters. And so it was: the touchpad didn’t work properly and the software was missing key features.

Through all of this, our position has been that Linux users would be better served if Dell would focus on improving Linux hardware compatibility across its line instead of trying to offer individual systems with Linux preinstalled. There are a lot of major areas where hardware support needs to be improved, especially on laptops, where power management and dual-mode graphics hardware are still not supported as well as they should be.

The preinstallation offerings in the past have been little more than a gimmick, especially given the small number of Dell systems for which it has historically been offered. The average Linux enthusiast is probably looking for a higher-end rig than the kind of ultra-budget systems that Dell has typically offered with Ubuntu. History has also shown that trying to sell Ubuntu on low-end systems to cost-conscious people who have never heard of Linux is not a winning formula.

More work to be done

Dell is clearly learning from its past mistakes and seems to have considered a lot of those issues in its Sputnik project. Using a desirable hardware configuration and focusing on developers as the audience is the right way to make an Ubuntu system that somebody might actually want to purchase.

Another area where Dell seems to be moving in the right direction with Sputnik is a focus on hardware enablement, which George talks about at length in his blog post. It’s not clear, however, whether Dell has fully learned what hardware enablement means with respect to the Linux desktop.

Hardware enablement that’s done solely to get a Linux system image that can be preinstalled on a specific hardware configuration is not particularly useful. It’s not enough to just make it work so that it can be shipped. If a computer requires a custom Linux build with binary drivers and a nonstandard configuration that can only be put together by the hardware manufacturer (which is exactly what Dell did with its Poulsbo-powered Mini 9 and some other previous systems) then it’s a failure before it even ships.

The drivers need to be open and upstream-friendly so that they can be maintained properly on an ongoing basis by people who actually know what they are doing. If the hardware isn’t fully compatible with a plain vanilla build of Ubuntu that has been downloaded from the Ubuntu website, then the user has no guarantee that the product will still be able to run up-to-date software for the full duration of its lifespan.

That’s the real problem that Dell needs to solve. Linux users want computers with known-good hardware configurations that they can continue to support themselves without having to rely on binary blobs from Dell that may or may not continue to work in the future. A major player like Dell has the resources and clout to start addressing that problem in a serious and meaningful way.

At the very least, the company needs to be careful to pick components that are supported well upstream. What would be ideal is if Dell started encouraging its hardware suppliers to open their drivers and merge them into the mainline kernel tree. That would be infinitely more constructive for advancing desktop Linux than any preinstallation scheme.

Of course, the two aren’t mutually exclusive. If Dell wants to use its ultrabook configuration as a starting point for working on better upstream drivers, then that’s great. What ultimately matters is for Dell to understand that the upstream work is the more important part of the equation.

It’s also critically important to understand that open drivers aren’t merely an idealogical preference. The ability to maintain driver code upstream is fundamental to the Linux development model and the only way to ensure sustainable long-term hardware support in the Linux ecosystem.

Dell’s interest in serving a Linux developer audience is commendable, and the Sputnik project seems to have a lot of great potential. But if Dell wants to make its Linux effort a success, the company has to start by understanding the upstream ecosystem and focusing on doing hardware enablement in a sustainable way.

Source:http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/05/new-dell-ubuntu-ultrabooks-a-step-in-the-right-direction-for-linux-support.ars?clicked=related_right

Linux running on an 8-bit processor

April 2nd, 2012

Being told that Linux requires a 32-bit processor, 1MB of memory, and a MMU (Memory Management Unit) as an absolute minimum wasn’t good enough for Dmitry Grinberg. When he saw threads on microcontroller boards asking whether Linux could run on an 8-bit microprocessor, the responses were full of ridicule, and outright dismissed the possibility.

In an attempt to prove the naysayers wrong, Dmitry went on to create an 8-bit computer using an ATmega1284p processor, a 16MB 30-pin SIMM, and a 1GB SD card for storage, all connected on a prototyping breadboard.

To emulate a 32-bit processor and the MMU, Dmitry had to write an ARM emulator. He decided against porting existing emulator due to the way AVR compiles to machine code, stating the issue of bit shifting integers by 20 causing zero values, among other potential problems. Working around these pitfalls would require careful modification of exiting code, a tedious and error-prone excersise.

A serial connection between the 8-bit computer and a modern 32-bit PC allows Dmitry to type commands and see the mini PC in action. The PC does not require this connection to function, and it can be modified to use its own LCD and keyboard.

For reference, the processor at the heart of this design runs at a grand total of 20MHz, has a two stage pipeline, and costs around $6. Also interesting to note is that Dmitry overclocked the processor to 24MHz. Factoring in the large overhead of the emulator, it was estimated that the effective clock rate is 6.5KHz (yep, kilohertz!)

Surprisingly the completed project actually works! Granted, it’s a little slow, but it can boot Ubuntu, which proves that you can actually run Linux on less than minimum spec. To quote Dmitry, “It takes about 2 hours to boot to bash prompt (“init=/bin/bash” kernel command line). Then 4 more hours to boot up the entire Ubuntu (“exec init” and then login). Starting X takes a lot longer.”

What’s really neat about the project is that it’s possible to build your own. The pin-outs, hardware spec and source code are all provided on Dmitry’s webpage. If you’re not willing to do it yourself, you can see it in the video below (it’s in 3x speed).

Source:http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/News/295658,going-old-school-linux-running-on-an-8-bit-processor.aspx

The world’s slowest Linux PC

March 30th, 2012

Hackers are masochists. Almost by definition, hackers push hardware and software (and themselves) beyond breaking point to find out, once and for all, whether something is possible or not. In Dmitry Grinberg’s case, he decided to find out the lowest spec possible for a Linux PC.

It is generally believed that Linux requires a 32-bit processor with a modern memory management unit (MMU) and more than 1MB of RAM. These numbers aren’t pulled out of thin air: The computer that Linus Torvalds developed Linux on housed an Intel 80386, the first 32-bit consumer CPU with proper memory management. Grinberg, obviously not a fan of excess bits, has successfully booted Linux with an ATmega1284p, 8-bit RISC microcontroller clocked at 24MHz and equipped with no less than 16KB of SRAM and 128KB of flash storage.

As you can see in the picture, though, Grinberg wasn’t able to overcome the RAM limitation, and so he’s added an old-school (circa 1980) 30-pin 16MB SIMM to the mix. There’s also a 1GB SD card on the back of the circuit board, which holds a copy of Ubuntu 9.04 (Jaunty).

How did Grinberg get Linux to actually boot on an 8-bit RISC microcontroller, though? Well, that’s the beautiful bit: He wrote an ARMv5 emulator. The ARMv5 is a 32-bit processor with an MMU, and so as far as Ubuntu is concerned everything’s fine. Software emulation of an ARM CPU on an 8-bit microcontroller obviously takes its toll, though. All told, Grinberg’s computer has an effective clockspeed of just 6.5KHz. To put that into perspective, a 2GHz CPU is 300,000 times faster (and in practice, with its modern hardware, we’re probably talking of an effective speed that’s millions of times faster).

Just how slow is a 6.5KHz computer? Well, it takes two hours to load a bash command prompt, and a further four hours to load Ubuntu. If you want to open an actual window manager, Grinberg simply says “starting X takes a lot longer.” We’re probably talking about days to perform any kind of complex, graphical task. Ever the optimist, though, Grinberg points out that “once booted, the system is somewhat usable,” and that the command line usually responds “within a minute.” Embedded below is a timelapse video of the world’s slowest Linux PC booting and running a few CLI commands.

On another positive note, Grinberg’s computer is very simple to put together — all you need is a few wires and a soldering iron — and it should be very cheap, too; on the order of $20, or so. With more than just a hint of hacker pride, Grinberg wraps up by saying that “This is definitely not the fastest, but I think it may be the cheapest, slowest, simplest to hand assemble, lowest part count, and lowest-end Linux PC.”

Source:http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/124287-the-worlds-slowest-linux-pc

Pivoting Linux in a Post-PC world

March 14th, 2012

That’s the percentage of Apple’s revenue generated by the sale of its iPod, iPhone, and iPad devices: what CEO Tim Cook refers to as their post-PC product line.

Cook revealed this figure as part of the ramp-up pitch for the new iPad last week, and emphasized (as one might expect at an launch event for what has proven to be the most popular tablet in computing history) Apple’s commitment to a post-PC future.

There has been a lot of attention paid to Cook’s statements, and not just because of iPad marketing hype. Just today, for instance, a report went over the wire about the analysts over at Gartner predicting that the “Personal cloud will replace personal computer”–with the idea that corporate data will be stored in the cloud and accessed through “smartphones, tablets, and other consumer devices.”

In other words, post PC hardware.

The idea of post PC has been brewing for some time, even here in the Linux community.

The success of Android, both commercially and as a target of lawsuits (because you’re not really successful until someone sues you, it seems), is predicated on the notion of the post-PC world.

Closer to Linux home, the moves of Canonical have been analyzed to death as a clear path towards this post-PC world. The Plasma community’s Spark tablet project, Mozilla’s Boot to Gecko, and the MeeGo-Tizen-whatever-they’re-calling-it-this-month Linux Foundation project are all additional Linux pioneers into this post-PC world.

I am of two minds about this whole notion of post PC. On the one hand, I freely admit that these sorts of devices are very useful to get work done on the fly. There have been countless times I have checked e-mail, read a document, even posted grades for a class from a post-PC device: exactly the kind of work one would expect could get done on such hardware. I have even written articles on such content, though it’s not my favorite thing to do, mostly because I crave ergonomic keyboards to do a lot of content creation.

But (and you knew this was coming), I also wonder how much real work–the kind we do on our PCs, regardless of operating system–can get done on these devices. When all is said and done, every post-PC device has a singular, common feature, no matter what operating system it uses: they all have one single screen that displays one app at a time.

And that, I would argue, is going to be a huge roadblock for productivity.

Indeed, while all of this post-PC hype is going on, I keep reading articles that suggest that the use of multiple monitors for business PCs is on the increase, which suggests that more people are stretching their attention across multiple apps in the workplace. This trend, if it is a real trend, would seem to run very counter to the idea of a single-screen post-PC device.

I offer myself as one anecdote. When I am wearing my writer’s hat, using a single screen is not that bad. In fact, it’s preferred, since getting distracted by something on Twitter or in my Inbox is not conducive to getting words on the screen.

But when the researcher’s hat is on, then having multiple windows open becomes much more of a necessity. If I am doing my personal and business finances, multiple windows are essential. Different jobs have different requirements, and a single-screen-only interface will not meet all my jobs’ requirements.

At this point, it is very likely that a usability expert will swoop in and tell me that I am Doing It Wrong and that I (and the rest of corporate PC users) will simply have to get used to the post-PC world and adapt our habits accordingly. Perhaps. We’ve done it before, after all, since PCs aren’t exactly a natural way of doing things.

But I have a sneaking suspicion that there’s about to be a bit of pushback on the post-PC revolution, as a lot of PC workers start resisting the idea of trying to get most or all of their work done on a post-PC device. Some, yes, but all?

Surprisingly, it may be Microsoft that will lead this counter-revolution. Their entry into the post-PC world, Windows 8, is such a farrago that they may, in order to salvage their Windows and oh-so-lucrative Office product lines, start to push a corporate-aimed marketing campaign aimed at a Windows-7 like platform (or Windows 8 sans the Metro UI) that will emphasize getting work done.

Either way, with Apple locked in to their post PC trajectory, and Microsoft trying to play catch-up so they don’t get blocked out of this sector (again), this could represent a unique opportunity for Linux: the chance to provide a clean, “traditional” desktop environment that would, through native and Web apps, provide corporate workers with the kind of PC environment they’re used to.

The cool thing is, Linux is well-positioned for this kind of move. For all the times I have poked the big commercial vendors for their constant emphasis on the enterprise while ignoring the small-business sector, the fact is that a corporate desktop could easily be marketed to those very same enterprise customers. The channel is already there.

It’s a stretch, of course, because I would imagine that Microsoft and Apple could likely pivot back to the corporate desktop if they had to. But it would certainly be funny if, while Microsoft and Apple were off chasing each other for post-PC land grabs, Linux vendors could slide into territories now ignored by these companies.

Post-PC is not the only way to go, and Linux vendors and designers should keep an eye out for other opportunities in the days ahead.

Source:http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/258258/pivoting-linux-post-pc-world

Pivoting Linux in a Post-PC world

March 14th, 2012

That’s the percentage of Apple’s revenue generated by the sale of its iPod, iPhone, and iPad devices: what CEO Tim Cook refers to as their post-PC product line.

Cook revealed this figure as part of the ramp-up pitch for the new iPad last week, and emphasized (as one might expect at an launch event for what has proven to be the most popular tablet in computing history) Apple’s commitment to a post-PC future.

There has been a lot of attention paid to Cook’s statements, and not just because of iPad marketing hype. Just today, for instance, a report went over the wire about the analysts over at Gartner predicting that the “Personal cloud will replace personal computer”–with the idea that corporate data will be stored in the cloud and accessed through “smartphones, tablets, and other consumer devices.”

In other words, post PC hardware.

The idea of post PC has been brewing for some time, even here in the Linux community.

The success of Android, both commercially and as a target of lawsuits (because you’re not really successful until someone sues you, it seems), is predicated on the notion of the post-PC world.

Closer to Linux home, the moves of Canonical have been analyzed to death as a clear path towards this post-PC world. The Plasma community’s Spark tablet project, Mozilla’s Boot to Gecko, and the MeeGo-Tizen-whatever-they’re-calling-it-this-month Linux Foundation project are all additional Linux pioneers into this post-PC world.

I am of two minds about this whole notion of post PC. On the one hand, I freely admit that these sorts of devices are very useful to get work done on the fly. There have been countless times I have checked e-mail, read a document, even posted grades for a class from a post-PC device: exactly the kind of work one would expect could get done on such hardware. I have even written articles on such content, though it’s not my favorite thing to do, mostly because I crave ergonomic keyboards to do a lot of content creation.

But (and you knew this was coming), I also wonder how much real work–the kind we do on our PCs, regardless of operating system–can get done on these devices. When all is said and done, every post-PC device has a singular, common feature, no matter what operating system it uses: they all have one single screen that displays one app at a time.

And that, I would argue, is going to be a huge roadblock for productivity.

Indeed, while all of this post-PC hype is going on, I keep reading articles that suggest that the use of multiple monitors for business PCs is on the increase, which suggests that more people are stretching their attention across multiple apps in the workplace. This trend, if it is a real trend, would seem to run very counter to the idea of a single-screen post-PC device.

I offer myself as one anecdote. When I am wearing my writer’s hat, using a single screen is not that bad. In fact, it’s preferred, since getting distracted by something on Twitter or in my Inbox is not conducive to getting words on the screen.

But when the researcher’s hat is on, then having multiple windows open becomes much more of a necessity. If I am doing my personal and business finances, multiple windows are essential. Different jobs have different requirements, and a single-screen-only interface will not meet all my jobs’ requirements.

At this point, it is very likely that a usability expert will swoop in and tell me that I am Doing It Wrong and that I (and the rest of corporate PC users) will simply have to get used to the post-PC world and adapt our habits accordingly. Perhaps. We’ve done it before, after all, since PCs aren’t exactly a natural way of doing things.

But I have a sneaking suspicion that there’s about to be a bit of pushback on the post-PC revolution, as a lot of PC workers start resisting the idea of trying to get most or all of their work done on a post-PC device. Some, yes, but all?

Surprisingly, it may be Microsoft that will lead this counter-revolution. Their entry into the post-PC world, Windows 8, is such a farrago that they may, in order to salvage their Windows and oh-so-lucrative Office product lines, start to push a corporate-aimed marketing campaign aimed at a Windows-7 like platform (or Windows 8 sans the Metro UI) that will emphasize getting work done.

Either way, with Apple locked in to their post PC trajectory, and Microsoft trying to play catch-up so they don’t get blocked out of this sector (again), this could represent a unique opportunity for Linux: the chance to provide a clean, “traditional” desktop environment that would, through native and Web apps, provide corporate workers with the kind of PC environment they’re used to.

The cool thing is, Linux is well-positioned for this kind of move. For all the times I have poked the big commercial vendors for their constant emphasis on the enterprise while ignoring the small-business sector, the fact is that a corporate desktop could easily be marketed to those very same enterprise customers. The channel is already there.

It’s a stretch, of course, because I would imagine that Microsoft and Apple could likely pivot back to the corporate desktop if they had to. But it would certainly be funny if, while Microsoft and Apple were off chasing each other for post-PC land grabs, Linux vendors could slide into territories now ignored by these companies.

Post-PC is not the only way to go, and Linux vendors and designers should keep an eye out for other opportunities in the days ahead.

Source: http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/258258/pivoting-linux-post-pc-world

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes