<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:osnews="http://osnews.com/rss2#">
	<channel>
		<title>OSNews: </title>
		<link>http://www.osnews.com/story/19795/VIA_Unveils_Open_Source_Notebook_Design</link>
		<description>Exploring the Future of Computing</description>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams</copyright>
		<webMaster>adam+nospam@osnews.com</webMaster>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:01:53 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		
		<item>
			<title>All popular Linux distributions</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315858</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315858</guid>
			<description>Define &quot;popular&quot; please.<br />
On one of the linked sites they talk about Ubuntu and SUSE. And.. G/OS. Seriously, I never heard about it. And it's not in the Top 300something of Distrowatch either (even though that doesn't say much).<br />
<br />
So what exactly do they mean with &quot;popular&quot;?</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:26:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Crono)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>.....</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315859</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315859</guid>
			<description>I like this company more and more each time I read something about them and plan to refit all my pcs with Via processors.<br />
 <br />
 Just got to love their concepts and think its the way forward for us in the developing world amidst the current energy challenges.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/27/via-openbook-hands-on/" rel="nofollow">http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/27/via-openbook-hands-on/</a> <br />
 <br />
GO Via!Edited 2008-05-27 23:40 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:38:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (islander)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: All popular Linux distributions</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315860</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315860</guid>
			<description><a href="http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gos" rel="nofollow">http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=gos</a><br />
<br />
Gos is number 30 on distrowatch at the moment</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:41:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (JPisini)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: All popular Linux distributions</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315862</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315862</guid>
			<description>It is GOS on Distrowatch and is at #30 presently.  I have never used it but if I recall correctly it was the distro preinstalled on the Linux PCs from Walmart.  Beyond that and the factor that it is an Ubuntu derivative I do not know much about it. It has seen commercial distribution before though so I would not classify it as obscure.<br />
<br />
Is it just me or does $500 for a starting price seem a bit high to be in competition with the EEE?  I would be interested in it to be sure but I would have to classify it in a slightly different market with the probable $600-800 price tag for a configured system.</description>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:49:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Kokopelli)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Via???</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315868</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315868</guid>
			<description>There are benchmarks of the VIA C7 and the Intel Celeron and Atom processors on the internet. Please check them out before you decide to buy a VIA based system.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 00:25:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (bolomkxxviii)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: All popular Linux distributions</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315869</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315869</guid>
			<description>EEE PC 900 is $550.  The 901 is set to be $650.  I think $500 is well competitive with that <img src="/images/emo/wink.gif" alt=";)" />   The specs are ballpark.  If they can put an Isaiah in it when that comes out the processor should be competitive (though until then, the c7 is as noted a little anemic).  Hard Drive instead of flash is a negative for some, a positive for others (space), though there's no reason someone couldn't stick a flash drive in there.  <br />
 <br />
 So yeah, price is a little higher than the EEE 2g surf, but $500 is lower than the current EEEs.  <br />
<br />
/disclosure: Just ordered an EEE myself.  Happy with the choice.  I like flash drive, and slightly smaller size.  But I wouldn't rule out the OpenBook.Edited 2008-05-28 00:46 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 00:40:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (MamiyaOtaru)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Processors</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315872</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315872</guid>
			<description>How has the design of their processors been coming along?  I don't have anything against them really, I like their mini-itx boards, however back in the day when I &quot;upgraded&quot; from a 486dx4 100mhz to a Cyrix PR200 (150mhz), I gained some processor cycles with a huge sacrifice to floating point operations.  We benchmarked that thing and it basically said the floating point compared to a 80287 coprocessor... around 1998-99.<br />
<br />
IIRC, which I may not <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /> , I believe that the VIA chips are originally based off the flawed Cyrix processors, does the new VIA versions fare any better?<br />
<br />
Or maybe I just ramble nonsense? <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 01:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (endar98)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>Give me a Pentium-M please.</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315876</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315876</guid>
			<description>[quote]...coupled with the higher levels of performance..[/quote]<br />
I read it through twice before I believed my eyes that they are claiming this. Yu know what higher levels of performance means when your YouTube video jitters...<br />
<br />
I really regret buying the VIA PC2500 mother board as it performs terribly (either CPU or disk controller wise) and it's not really that cheap. I can get a comparable (and certainly better) AOpen P-M MB + CPU for the same amount of money, even using roughly the same amount of electricity, maybe?</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 01:20:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (shyouko)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Processors</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315877</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315877</guid>
			<description>Right, it's still doing floating point maths at snail speed, even on the C7.Edited 2008-05-28 01:22 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 01:21:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (shyouko)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: .....</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315879</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315879</guid>
			<description>It's just marketing when they cannot compete on real performance. About performance per watt? Lose hands down to any modern Intel or AMD offering.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 01:25:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (shyouko)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315884</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315884</guid>
			<description>What program are the CAD files for? If they are saved in Autodesk's proprietary CAD format, then you can hardly call the design &quot;open&quot;.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 02:28:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Munchkinguy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>openbook</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315900</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315900</guid>
			<description>I still remember the cyrix chip. Oh man it was bad, my PC would hang suddenly and so many compatibilies issue<br />
<br />
Anyway this would make a good low cost smart client laptop. Running Windows player and browser locally and running processor intensive apps on the server via ThinServer<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.aikotech.com/thinserver.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.aikotech.com/thinserver.htm</a></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 06:02:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Different)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315909</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315909</guid>
			<description>Well it's about open hardware, not neccerely open software. (The specs even mentions Windows XP)Edited 2008-05-28 07:00 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 06:58:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (TLZ_)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315934</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315934</guid>
			<description>Do you know any alternative compatible files? You may suggest a file format to then, you know...<br />
<br />
(the cruel reality is... this manufacture partners are using plain common proprietary CAD... sad, but true...)</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 11:36:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (JrezIN)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Via???</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315939</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315939</guid>
			<description>They really need to get the Via Isaiah chip out soon; I haven't seen a single POSITIVE review of Via chips in the popular press (the HP 2133's ratings have suffered due to the C7 being slow).  They need a better chip, fast.</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 12:48:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (DigitalAxis)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>great</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315948</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315948</guid>
			<description>Regardless performance debate, opening design of such things can only be welcome, even if it's much harder to build those than it is to recompile software.<br />
Of course if VIA wants to donate one so we can port Haiku to it, we'd be happy to oblige. <img src="/images/emo/smile.gif" alt=";)" /></description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 14:43:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (mmu_man)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315958</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315958</guid>
			<description><b>(the cruel reality is... this manufacture partners are using plain common proprietary CAD... sad, but true...)</b><br />
<br />
the cruel reality is that there is no open-source cad application availabel (only some little sketching-tools)<br />
<br />
and for file-formats it only gets as open as dxf and xt</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 16:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (smashIt)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[2]: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315963</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315963</guid>
			<description>The open standard is DXF (see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DXF" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DXF</a>).Edited 2008-05-28 17:24 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 17:23:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Munchkinguy)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE: Processors</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?315992</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?315992</guid>
			<description>I'm afraid this is mostly nonsense - perhaps due to a badly written benchmark program (not uncommon). Actually, the Cyrix FPU needed 4-7 cycles to do a FADD (a typical operation) while the i387 needed 23-34, and the i287 took 70-100 cycles to do the same.<br />
<br />
Regarding FSQRT (important in many early 3D games) the numbers are 59-60 for Cyrix, 122-129 for the i387, and 180-186 for the i287.<br />
<br />
On integer code, the Cyrix chip was faster than a Pentium, &quot;clock for clock&quot;, and thus much faster than a i486 (see datasheets).<br />
<br />
Also, while VIA sold the Cyrix designs for a while, the IDT/Centaur-designed C3 and C7 has nothing to do with the Cyrix chips, at least not regaring technical solutions used.<br />
<br />
/Best Regards</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 19:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (Henrik)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[3]: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?316045</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?316045</guid>
			<description><div class="cquote"><b>(the cruel reality is... this manufacture partners are using plain common proprietary CAD... sad, but true...)</b> the cruel reality is that there is no open-source cad application availabel (only some little sketching-tools) </div><br />
  <br />
  Quite a few of these Linux CAD applications:<br />
  <br />
  <a href="http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.tech-edv.co.at/lunix/CADlinks.html</a><br />
 <a href="http://linuxgazette.net/issue54/frost.html" rel="nofollow">http://linuxgazette.net/issue54/frost.html</a><br />
 <a href="http://www.roseindia.net/linux/linux-cad-software.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.roseindia.net/linux/linux-cad-software.shtml</a>  <br />
<a href="http://caladan.nanosoft.ca/software.php" rel="nofollow">http://caladan.nanosoft.ca/software.php</a><br />
  <br />
  ... are considerably more capable than &quot;some little sketching-tools&quot;.<br />
  <br />
  <a href="http://www.cad-schroer.com/index.php?screen=1.3&amp;ziel=Products-MEDUSA&amp;land=com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cad-schroer.com/index.php?screen=1.3&amp;ziel=Products-M...</a>   <br />
  <br />
  <a href="http://www.ribbonsoft.com/qcad.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.ribbonsoft.com/qcad.html</a> <br />
  <br />
  <a href="http://www.varicad.com/en/home/" rel="nofollow">http://www.varicad.com/en/home/</a><br />
  <br />
  A number of them (such as Qcad) are open source.<br />
<br />
There is even an option for PCB layout and production:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.cadsoft.de/info.htmEdited" rel="nofollow">http://www.cadsoft.de/info.htmEdited</a> 2008-05-29 03:37 UTC</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 03:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (lemur2)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>

		<item>
			<title>RE[4]: CAD files</title>
			<link>http://osnews.com/thread?316086</link>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://osnews.com/thread?316086</guid>
			<description>and which of these tools are opensource and useable?<br />
<br />
qcad is just a little sketching-tool (as is autocad)</description>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 18:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
			<author>donotreply@osnews.com (smashIt)</author>
			<category>Comments</category>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
