[GTALUG] Voting with our Dollars on Computing Future that Respects our Freedom.

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 08:55:25AM -0400, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
> I remember having discussions about this all those 5 years ago.
> My argument is largely the same.
> First off I like the idea of readability  because there is lots of hardware
> out there that is perfectly serviceable but is setting on shelves doing
> nothing or taking up space in landfills.
> 
> This is basically a raspberry pi without the ability to access the features.
> 
> For things like custom controllers I can go and buy a pi and a few add-ons
> then plug it into a box and I have my little music player to put in a corner
> or my led light controller to make fancy designs on my walls but with the
> EOMA-68 I need a breakout carrier and some extra hardware before I am in the
> same place.
> 
> For laptop's the memory, speed and heat generated by a usable laptop make
> the EOMA-68 a very difficult design choice.
> The reason for laptop upgrades is often needing more memory or disk space
> but by the time you get there 2-3 years down the road the keyboard has food
> bits under it and the touch pad is wearing out so getting a new laptop is
> the way to go.
> The EOMA-68 will do very little to alleviate those problems.

The interface as currently designed is very pin limited, and because of
choices made 5 years ago, 1/3 of the pins are used for an LCD interface
that I suspect is becoming a dead end very soon.  eDP and such are taking
over and using a lot less pins.

So while the idea of having a standard interface is nice, it always ends
up not fitting the needs of the future.

I have dealt with CPU boards from Compulab (based in Israel, and makers
of things like the utilite mini computers), and they tried to make an
interface that could be common between multiple CPUs and had a bit of
success with some of them, but it was never very many boards before
something had to change.  PCI changed to PCIe, some boards had 2 UARTs,
some had 4, some had 5, some had LPC, some did not, some had IDE, some
did not, etc.  And unlike EOMA-68, they really did try to give you access
to most of the features, hence they usually had 180+ pins, and of course
you had to screw the module to the mainboard, not just plug it in.

Certainly to me, a laptop without support for SATA makes very little
sense, and so few USB ports makes no sense, and the screen resolutions
supported is rather sad by todays standards, the power limits are very
restrictive in terms of what can be used, and saying the CPU module
maker is responsible for cooling considerations while being put in a
pcmcia form factor does not make sense.

As for the idea on the website that someone would want to move a CPU
module between a tablet, phone, laptop, TV, etc all the time, that's
just silly.  Why would I want to do that, espcially with the pathetically
slow CPUs that are going to be in these modules?  Dual core A7?
No thanks.  My current dual core phone is sluggish enough and it is much
faster than those.

Had it been finished and released 5 years ago, it might have been slightly
interesting, but at this point the design is obviously completely out of
date and no longer fits with anything modern you might want to use it for.

-- 
Len Sorensen