Hi,
First laptop dock for Intel's copy: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/42685-nexdock-transforms-intel-compute-c...
14", switchable ports.
- Lauri
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Lauri Kasanen cand@gmx.com wrote:
Hi,
First laptop dock for Intel's copy: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/42685-nexdock-transforms-intel-compute-c...
oo that looks familiar! :)
l.
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Lauri Kasanen cand@gmx.com wrote:
Hi,
First laptop dock for Intel's copy: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/42685-nexdock-transforms-intel-compute-c...
oo that looks familiar! :)
l.
If it's reasonably cheaper than EOMA68 variant, then we have a problem.
if I remember correctly, the first EOMA68 cards will be $35 at volume, and Intel is advertising Skylake and Kabylake CPUs in their Compute Cards, so its clearly x86. Since they're targeting the mainstream will inevitably make their cards run Winodws. To make a $35 computer run desktop windows, you're going to have a bad time. They simply can't push the 4GB+ of RAM and 64GB+ of storage necessary to run Windows into a $35 card. $50? maybe? probably?
Now, what about the laptop chassis? EOMA68 currently has a $500 chassis available. I haven't seen any volume pricing or other options for reducing the price down to a level more managable for a "normie" who's used to $200-300 throwaway laptops. $500 for an "empty shell" is really easy for a behomoth like Intel to beat. Heck, they could do a fully-fledged laptop casing and include a Windows-capable compute card for less than that because they have more money to play with, and could even sell at a loss to build marketshare.
So we can easily beat Intel on pricing for the computer cards, but on the docks? that's where we've got issues. It's hard to convince "normies" that Intel's ME is a problem, especially if they're already heavily invested in Windows and x86. For many of the people we're pitching our platform to, we're not only getting them to switch to Linux, we're also getting them to switch CPU architectures, and pay more for the hardware, too.
We're basically telling the "normies" that "yeah, we're better, but you can't run Windows, you can't run any of the games you currently play, and you have to pay more" which is really hard to sell.
-R
On 01/22/2017 04:02 PM, Lyberta wrote:
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Lauri Kasanen cand@gmx.com wrote:
Hi,
First laptop dock for Intel's copy: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/42685-nexdock-transforms-intel-compute-c...
oo that looks familiar! :)
l.
If it's reasonably cheaper than EOMA68 variant, then we have a problem.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
On 01/22/2017 05:32 PM, ryan wrote:
Now, what about the laptop chassis? EOMA68 currently has a $500 chassis available. I haven't seen any volume pricing or other options for reducing the price down to a level more managable for a "normie" who's used to $200-300 throwaway laptops. $500 for an "empty shell" is really easy for a behomoth like Intel to beat. Heck, they could do a fully-fledged laptop casing and include a Windows-capable compute card for less than that because they have more money to play with, and could even sell at a loss to build marketshare.
I think one of the videos had Luke saying that it would probably be ~$300 at mass volume.
In any case, the current EOMA68 laptop has something else you're leaving out: the fact that it is built of several easily obtainable parts, with everything else 3-D printed. Meaning it's *repairable*. The laptop mentioned for Intel compute cards is just a standard laptop case.
Also, I would like to point out that the laptop is *not* made by Intel. It's made by a small company that made a similar product in the past (utilizing things like smartphones) through IndieGoGo. I seriously doubt Intel will directly subsidize them, so they won't be able to sell their laptop chassis at a loss. Unless there's some kind of license fee that needs to be paid out, Intel probably isn't even aware of the project.
What's it going to cost, anyway? I don't see any indication of what it's going to cost, or any concrete information, really. It could be more expensive than the EOMA68 15" laptop, for all we know.
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:32 PM, ryan rrryan@tds.net wrote:
Now, what about the laptop chassis? EOMA68 currently has a $500 chassis available.
the BOM's $160 for a run of only 500. the BOM for 10k or 100k? peanuts.
l.
Other sites running the news http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/1/19/14329102/nexdock-intel-comp... http://www.pcmag.com/news/351107/new-nexdock-uses-intel-compute-card-to-beco...
In reply to ryan's concerns, I feel the Intel card will fail for the very reasons the EOMA68 cards will succeed. The Intel card is not open, and Intel will of course try and milk money out of the platform. OEMs DON'T want users saving the environment and spending years with one shell. Quite the opposite, they want you coming back year after year for the new model. So then what do we have? We have a closed card, with no OEM love. Intel won't make a successor card. On the other hand, we have the EOMA68, which already has successor cards potentiated (rockchip,samsung,all that good stuff luke is testing in china) and as an open standard anyone can take up, there's actually a business in just tracking down processors to throw into cards (And in fact if you can Luke, point this out to Rockchip when you meet them) As you said, people will try and put Windows on the Intel card, with all the drama swapping resolutions etc will bring with windows drivers being the shitfest they are, but because the EOMA is so open, one can trivially do all this swapping, AND TROUBLESHOOT ANY CRASHES LITERALLY WITH A INTERNET SEARCH OR THE COMMUNITY, unlike waiting on Microsoft.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton < lkcl@lkcl.net> wrote:
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:32 PM, ryan rrryan@tds.net wrote:
Now, what about the laptop chassis? EOMA68 currently has a $500 chassis available.
the BOM's $160 for a run of only 500. the BOM for 10k or 100k? peanuts.
l.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Allan Mwenda allanitomwesh@gmail.com wrote:
shitfest they are, but because the EOMA is so open, one can trivially do all this swapping, AND TROUBLESHOOT ANY CRASHES LITERALLY WITH A INTERNET SEARCH OR THE COMMUNITY, unlike waiting on Microsoft.
one nice thing, people will start putting dynamic drivers into linux to support screen-size swapping and so on.
which means it will be easy to adapt to EOMA68... :)
l.
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
On January 23, 2017 9:13:17 PM GMT+03:00, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net wrote:
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Allan Mwenda allanitomwesh@gmail.com wrote:
shitfest they are, but because the EOMA is so open, one can trivially
do all
this swapping, AND TROUBLESHOOT ANY CRASHES LITERALLY WITH A INTERNET
SEARCH
OR THE COMMUNITY, unlike waiting on Microsoft.
one nice thing, people will start putting dynamic drivers into linux to support screen-size swapping and so on.
which means it will be easy to adapt to EOMA68... :)
l.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Allan Mwenda allanitomwesh@gmail.com wrote:
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
or... i should publish all of them via the mailing list, wiki, irc channel with its independently publicly-recorded logs (in two separate locations), as well as maintain a git repository which records the chronological order (to the second) of all changes made to the website, which will be corroborated by archive.org (an independent organisation), and maintain a standard on an independent website (elinux.org) over which i have no direct control in its administration, thus confirming in at least a dozen different ways, witnessed by several hundred other people, that there exists prior art, through which i can simply tell anyone trying to claim that they own any patents related to *any* of the EOMA68 modular designs, that they can go fuck themselves. how about that? ;)
l.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net wrote:
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Allan Mwenda allanitomwesh@gmail.com wrote:
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
or... i should publish all of them via the mailing list, wiki, irc channel with its independently publicly-recorded logs (in two separate locations), as well as maintain a git repository which records the chronological order (to the second) of all changes made to the website, which will be corroborated by archive.org (an independent organisation), and maintain a standard on an independent website (elinux.org) over which i have no direct control in its administration, thus confirming in at least a dozen different ways, witnessed by several hundred other people, that there exists prior art, through which i can simply tell anyone trying to claim that they own any patents related to *any* of the EOMA68 modular designs, that they can go fuck themselves. how about that? ;)
I like it :)
l.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
yea that would work too.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:51 PM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net wrote:
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Allan Mwenda allanitomwesh@gmail.com wrote:
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
or... i should publish all of them via the mailing list, wiki, irc channel with its independently publicly-recorded logs (in two separate locations), as well as maintain a git repository which records the chronological order (to the second) of all changes made to the website, which will be corroborated by archive.org (an independent organisation), and maintain a standard on an independent website (elinux.org) over which i have no direct control in its administration, thus confirming in at least a dozen different ways, witnessed by several hundred other people, that there exists prior art, through which i can simply tell anyone trying to claim that they own any patents related to *any* of the EOMA68 modular designs, that they can go fuck themselves. how about that? ;)
l.
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to arm-netbook@files.phcomp.co.uk
On 01/23/2017 02:23 PM, Allan Mwenda wrote:
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
Intel doesn't have grounds to start patenting this design idea now.
Though I do wonder, is there a clear case of prior art for this kind of thing that would invalidate any possible patents? Something technically designed as a fully functioning computer that plugs into the thing that gives it all its interfaces? If there is, it would probably be good to know about it. The last thing we would want is a patent troll coming along demanding royalties for some obscure patent. :)
On 01/23/2017 02:50 PM, Julie Marchant wrote:
Though I do wonder, is there a clear case of prior art for this kind of thing that would invalidate any possible patents? Something technically designed as a fully functioning computer that plugs into the thing that gives it all its interfaces? If there is, it would probably be good to know about it. The last thing we would want is a patent troll coming along demanding royalties for some obscure patent. :)
Actually, I think I've got one: the Super Game Boy. That was actually a fully-functioning computer with no inputs or outputs of its own; it plugged into a SNES to get all its inputs and outputs. So really, you could say that it was one of the earlier computer cards, while the SNES was its housing.
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Julie Marchant onpon4@riseup.net wrote:
On 01/23/2017 02:23 PM, Allan Mwenda wrote:
You should patent all the things before Intel just i n case they REALLY decide they thought of this first
Intel doesn't have grounds to start patenting this design idea now.
Though I do wonder, is there a clear case of prior art for this kind of thing that would invalidate any possible patents? Something technically designed as a fully functioning computer that plugs into the thing that gives it all its interfaces?
there's an expired patent where someone dual-purposed PCMCIA. the drawing even has an LCD built-in to the Card. basically the patent was on detection of whether it was plugged into a PCMCIA socket (or not), if yes, it behaved as a PCMCIA Card, if no, it behaved as a modular computer.
there's a patent from 18+ months ago by microsoft (saw it on slashdot) for a totally-modular-computer-thing...
then there's also the "Blade" Server concept, which has been around forever...
... basically it's not sufficiently innovative to warrant actually bothering to patent. anybody that tries is asking to have their patent referred for invalidation.
l.
Though I do wonder, is there a clear case of prior art for this kind of thing that would invalidate any possible patents? Something technically designed as a fully functioning computer that plugs into the thing that gives it all its interfaces? If there is, it would probably be good to know about it. The last thing we would want is a patent troll coming along demanding royalties for some obscure patent. :)
AFAIK the recommendation in this matter is: better not know, since knowingly infringing is a more serious offense and unknowingly infringing.
Stefan
On 01/24/2017 08:29 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
AFAIK the recommendation in this matter is: better not know, since knowingly infringing is a more serious offense and unknowingly infringing.
That's for *current* patents, not examples of prior art that would invalidate such patents.
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Lyberta lyberta@lyberta.net wrote:
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton:
On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Lauri Kasanen cand@gmx.com wrote:
Hi,
First laptop dock for Intel's copy: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/mobile/42685-nexdock-transforms-intel-compute-c...
oo that looks familiar! :)
l.
If it's reasonably cheaper than EOMA68 variant, then we have a problem.
it would appear that way, initially, but remember that EOMA68 takes the long view... and expects users to be happy enough with being *long term* financially responsible and saving themselves money.
additionally, there is the advantage that you can upgrade or add on as additional funds become available.
but, more than that, i'm keenly aware - have been for years - that intel simply cannot deliver low-end, low-cost competitive x86 processors.... period. it's *literally* impossible for them to do so. as in, it's *literally* an engineering impossibility thanks to the compactness of the x86 instruction set. i've written about this at some length, a number of times.
so they are making up for this by subsidising the market THREE times. to the OEMs, to the wholesalers, AND TO THE USERS.
intel are PAYING the OEMs to make designs based around their processors
intel are PAYING the wholesalers to stock products based around their processors
intel are providing VOUCHERS to end-users who buy the products.
at some point various monopolies and mergers commissions around the world are going to start noticing that and taking an interest, at which point intel will be forced to put the prices back up to their *real* values, which are far in excess of the alternative offerings based around ARM and MIPS.
l.
arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
-
Adam Van Ymeren -
Allan Mwenda -
Julie Marchant -
Lauri Kasanen -
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton -
Lyberta -
Peter Carlson -
ryan -
Stefan Monnier