[Arm-netbook] so where does ULP-COM fit into our thinking?

[luke.leighton]

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Simon Kenyon <simon at koala.ie> wrote:
> On 10/10/12 15:18, Gordan Bobic wrote:
>> On 10/10/2012 03:05 PM, green wrote:
>>> Simon Kenyon wrote at 2012-10-10 02:43 -0500:
>>>> do we really, really think that people will be swapping cards between
>>>> enclosures on an hourly basis? i think it is worth looking at the relative
>>>> costs of the card and the devices. it would seem likely that people would
>>>> have one card per device and only change the card when there was a major
>>>> upgrade in the card capabilities.
>>>
>>> My personal usage would include somehow switching from pocket-size tablet to
>>> laptop multiple times per day, whether by moving a EOMA68 card or by simply
>>> connecting the display and keyboard by cable.  The advantages as I see it are
>>> only a single operating system to maintain and a practically identical
>>> software experience regardless of chassis style.  Synchronization across many
>>> devices, architectures, and operating systems suddenly becomes a non-issue.
>>
>> I can see this type of usage leading to a really poor experience as the
>> screen resolution changes. All the desktop icons would get re-arranged,
>> and different device formats require a fundamentally different user
>> interface. Toshiba AC100 was a massive commercial failure purely because
>> it is an Android device without a touchscreen, which is pretty much
>> unusuable. Put normal Linux on it and use it as a laptop, and it's a
>> fantastic machine.
>>
>> The point being that for a small touchscreen device like a phone or a
>> slate you really want a user interface optimized for that experience,
>> e.g. Android. For laptop/desktop usage with a keyboard, you want a more
>> traditional user interface.
>>
>> While switching between the two is a nice feature to have for the
>> future, at the moment, the OS' user experience provisions simply don't
>> exist to make this use-case workable.
>>
>> Plus, the chances are that a chassis containing a touchscreen, a
>> battery, and possibly a keyboard if it's a laptop, is likely to cost
>> more than an EOMA module at mass-production prices, so the monetary
>> saving on the hot-swapping isn't that great - it needs to be a usability
>> and convenience driven advantage, rather than a cost drive one.
>
> i think this "continual swapping" use-case is rather a stretch (to
> bowdlerise what i really think).

 not a problem.  it means that you (personally) would not wish to use
EOMA modules in that fashion.  whatever any of us think, personally,
however, cannot be used as an argument to rule out the capability.

> having a swappable core is an altogether different proposition.
> my current computer has had three motherboards (at least) over its
> lifetime. i was able to swap them because they have the same form
> factor. this is a much more compelling argument for EOMA68.

 and it's one that i'm glad to see you raise, because this too [the
EOMA68 equivalent of swapping out "motherboards"] is also possible.

 however: can you imagine an 80-year-old grandmother or a busy mother
*ever* swapping out the motherboard of a PC?

 if on the other hand the CPU Card was a commodity item, off-the-shelf
from Tesco's, Morrison's, Asda or Sainsbury's, you see that they would
be much more comfortable with the idea of upgrading their computer,
yes?

 it takes seconds to press the button on a PCMCIA slot and put in a
new card.  it takes an unskilled person several days to research the
risks, get up the courage and then several hours to change a PC
motherboard.

 l.