Hardware Archive
“Synology-branded drives will be needed for use in the newly announced Plus series, with plans to update the Product Compatibility List as additional drives can be thoroughly vetted in Synology systems,” a Synology representative told Ars by email. “Extensive internal testing has shown that drives that follow a rigorous validation process when paired with Synology systems are at less risk of drive failure and ongoing compatibility issues.” Without a Synology-branded or approved drive in a device that requires it, NAS devices could fail to create storage pools and lose volume-wide deduplication and lifespan analysis, Synology’s German press release stated. Similar drive restrictions are already in place for XS Plus and rack-mounted Synology models, though work-arounds exist. ↫ Kevin Purdy at Ars Technica I’m honestly surprised it’s taken Synology this long to start nickle-and-diming its users. I’m sure the “Synology-branded” drives will carry substantial markups over regular drives, despite the drives being otherwise identical. Charging insane markups for expansion options is a tried-and-true way to increase your margins, with Apple being the classic example of charging insane prices for basic RAM or SSD upgrades. I think most of us here on OSNews could easily build our own NAS, as it’s not a particularly complex project. The various software options could be a bit more complicated to navigate, but I don’t think it’s insurmountable for most of us. Normal, average people, though, would most likely do best to just buy an off-the-shelf NAS for their storage and local back-up needs, and it’s those kind of people who Synology is aiming this policy at. They’ll be easily fooled into thinking Synology-branded drives are somehow special, and not just a generic drive with a fancy sticker. This is how the world works, but that doesn’t make it any less unpleasant.
This is a very small blog post about my first reverse engineering project, in which I don’t really reverse engineer anything yet, but I am just getting started! A family member asked me to add additional book data to the LeapStart he bought for his son, this is the starting point here. ↫ leloubil’s blog We’ve all seen toy, child-focused computers like these, and I always find them deeply fascinating. I’m not buying them for my own kids – they’ll get their start on a “real” computer I’ll set up for them to explore and break – but I see their value, and they’re probably a better choice than giving a kid a tablet or whatever (which my wife and I are opposed to for our kids). What fascinates me about them is, of course, what software, and more specifically, what operating system they run. It turns out this one most likely runs on something called µC/OS-II, one of the many relatively obscure embedded operating systems you never hear about. µC/OS is a full-featured embedded operating system originally developed by Micriµm. In addition to the two highly popular kernels, µC/OS features support for TCP/IP, USB-Device, USB-Host, and Modbus, as well as a robust File System. ↫ µC/OS GitHub page The documentation provides a lot more detail about its capabilities, so if you’re interested in learning more, that’s your starting point.
The AlphaStation 500 is a workstation from Digital, circa 1996. Mine is a 500 MHz model and has an Alpha 21164A processor (aka EV56). And the way it boots is weird. On your common-or-garden PC, there has always been some kind of ROM chip. It holds a piece of firmware known as the BIOS. This ROM chip is available at a well-known location in the processor’s address space (remembering that any PC processor boots up in 16-bit, 8088 compatible mode, with a 1 MiB address space, just like an IBM PC 5150) and the processor just starts executing code in it after reset. The Alpha (or at least this AlphaStation 500 – although I think they mostly worked like this) is different. ↫ Jonathan ‘theJPster’ Pallant A great read, but a little bit over my head considering I’m anything but a programmer or developer. Still, even I managed to get the basic gist and learn quite a bit from this article, and especially the part about how the AlphaStation uses a little jumper to tell the SROM exactly which stream of boot code to send to the processor is fascinating. I’m not sure just how unusual the Alpha’s way of booting is, but I’d at least never heard of it.
SoftBank Group Corp. today announced that it will acquire Ampere Computing, a leading independent silicon design company, in an all-cash transaction valued at $6.5 billion. Under the terms of the agreement, Ampere will operate as a wholly owned subsidiary of SoftBank Group and retain its name. As part of the transaction, Ampere’s lead investors – Carlyle and Oracle – are selling their respective positions in Ampere. ↫ SoftBank and Ampere Computing press release Despite not really knowing what SoftBank does and what their long-term goals are – I doubt anyone does – I hope this at the very least provides Ampere with the funds needed to expand its business. At this point, the only serious options for Arm-based hardware are either Apple or Qualcomm, and we could really use more players. Ampere’s hardware is impressive, but difficult to buy and expensive, and graphics card support is patchy, at best. What Ampere needs is more investment, and more OEMs picking up their chips. An Ampere workstation is incredibly high on my list of machines to test for OSNews (perhaps a System76 model?), and it’d be great if economies of scale worked to bring the prices down, possibly allowing Ampere to developer cheaper, more affordable variants for us mere mortals, too. I would love to build an Arm workstation in much the same way we build regular x86 PCs today, but I feel like that’s still far off. I have no idea if SoftBank is the right kind of company to make this possible, but one can dream.
It’s barely been two months after the announcement that Pebble would return with new watches, and they’re already here – well, sort of. Pebble has announced two new watches for preorder, the Core 2 Duo and the Core Time 2. The former is effectively a Pebble 2, upgraded with new internals, while the Core Time 2 is very similar, but comes with a colour e-ink display and a metal case. They’re up for preorder now at $149 and $225, respectively, with the Core 2 Duo shipping in July, and the Core Time 2 shipping in December. Alongside this unveil, Eric Migicovsky, the creator of Pebble, also published a blog post detailing the trouble Pebble is and will have with making smartwatches for iOS users. Apple effectively makes it impossible for third parties to make a proper smartwatch for iOS, since access to basic functionality you’d come to expect from such a device are locked by Apple, reserved only for its own Apple Watch. As such, Migicovsky makes it explicitly clear that iOS users who want to buy one of these new Pebbles will are going to have a very degraded experience compared to Android users. Not only will Android users with Pebble have access to a ton more functionality, any Pebble features that could exist for both Android and iOS users will always come to Android first, and possibly iOS later. In fact, Migicovksy goes as far as suggesting that if you want a Pebble, you should buy an Android phone. I don’t want to see any tweets or blog posts or complaints or whatever later on about this. I’m publishing this now so you can make an informed decision about whether to buy a new watch or not. If you’re worried about this, the easiest solution is to buy an Android phone. ↫ Eric Migicovsky I have to hand it to Migicovksy – I love the openness about this, and the fact he’s making this explicitly clear to any prospective buyers. There’s no sugarcoating or PR speak to try and please Tim Cook – he’s putting the blame squarely where it belongs: on Apple. It’s kind of unreal to see such directness about a new product, but as a Dutch person, it feels quite natural. We need more of this style of communication in the technology world, as it makes it much clearer that you’re getting – and not getting. I do hope that Pebble’s Android support functions without the need for Google Play Services or other proprietary Google code, since it would be great to have a proper, open source smartwatch fully supported by de-Googled Android.
Brother laser printers are popular recommendations for people seeking a printer with none of the nonsense. By nonsense, we mean printers suddenly bricking features, like scanning or printing, if users install third-party cartridges. Some printer firms outright block third-party toner and ink, despite customer blowback and lawsuits. Brother’s laser printers have historically worked fine with non-Brother accessories. A YouTube video posted this week, though, as well as older social media posts, claim that Brother has gone to the dark side and degraded laser printer functionality with third-party cartridges. Brother tells Ars that this isn’t true. ↫ Scharon Harding at Ars Technica I find this an incredibly interesting story. We all know the printer space is a cursed hellhole of the very worst worst types of enshittification, but Brother seemed like an island of relative calm in a sea of bullshit. In turn, people are so used to printers being shit, that any problem that comes up is automatically explained by malice, which is not entirely unreasonable. Borther insists, though, that it does not break printers using third-party toner or ink through firmware. Brother does make it very clear that it is standard procedure to only perform troubleshooting on Brother printers using ‘genuine’ Brother ink and toner, which is not entirely unreasonable in my book. There’s no telling what kind of effects third part cartridges – which do contain electronics – have on the rest of the printer, and I don’t think it’s fair to expect Brother to be able to document all of those possible issues. As long as using third-party toner and ink cartridges doesn’t invalidate any warranties, and as long as Brother doesn’t intentionally break printers for using third-party toner and ink, I think Brother meets its obligations to consumers. If you choose to use third-party ink and toner cartridges in Brother printers, I think it’s only reasonable you remove those during the troubleshooting process to ensure they’re not the cause of any problems you’re experiencing.
If you have type 1 diabetes, you need to keep track of and manage your blood glucose levels closely, as if these levels dip too low, it can quickly spiral into a medical emergency. Andrew Childs’ 9 year old son has type 1 diabetes, and Childs was unhappy with any of the current offerings on the market for children to keep track of their blood glucose levels. Most people suggested an Apple Watch, but he found the Apple Watch “too much device” for a kid, something I personally agree with. It ships with so many shiny features and apps and notifications. It’s beautifully crafted. It’s also way too distracting for a kid while they’re at school. Secondly, it doesn’t provide a good, reliable view of his CGM data. The Dexcom integration is often backgrounded, doesn’t show the chart, only the number and an arrow. People use hacks like creating calendar events just to see up-to-date data. And the iOS settings, Screen Time, and notification systems have ballooned into a giant ball of complexity. What we need is something simple. ↫ Andrew Childs And so Childs set out to design and prototype a smartwatch just for his son to wear, trying to address the shortcomings of other offerings on the market along the way, and possibly even bring it to market for other people in similar situations. After six months, he managed to create several prototypes, with both the software and hardware designed from the ground up, that he and his son still wear to this day, to great satisfaction. Since Childs didn’t really know where to go from there and how to turn what he had into an actual product people could be, he decided to document his effort online. In the process, he had to overcome a ton of hurdles, from iOS’ strict BLE limitations, difficult-to-reach soldering points that can’t be moved due to the small size of the PCB, optimising the battery life, dealing with glass manufacturing, and many other issues, big and small. Oh and also, he was a software engineer, not a hardware one, so he had to learn a lot of new skills, from working with 3D modeling to PCB design. In the end, though, he’s now got a few devices that look quite professionally made, that are incredibly easy to repair, and that are focused solely on those things he and his son need. This project has increased the quality of life for his son, and that’s genuinely all that really matters here.
Eric Migicovsky, founder of Pebble, the original smartwatch maker, made a major announcement today together with Google. Pebble was originally bought by Fitbit and in turn Fitbit was then bought by Google, but Migicovsky always wanted to to go back to his original idea and create a brand new smartwatch. PebbleOS took dozens of engineers working over 4 years to build, alongside our fantastic product and QA teams. Reproducing that for new hardware would take a long time. Instead, we took a more direct route – I asked friends at Google (which bought Fitbit, which had bought Pebble’s IP) if they could open source PebbleOS. They said yes! Over the last year, a team inside Google (including some amazing ex-Pebblers turned Googlers) has been working on this. And today is the day – the source code for PebbleOS is now available at github.com/google/pebble (see their blog post). ↫ Eric Migicovsky Of course, this is amazing news for the still-thriving community of Pebble users who have kept the platform and their devices going through sheer force of will, but it also means Pebble is going to making a comeback in a more official capacity: alongside the announcement of PebbleOS becoming open source, there’s also the unveiling of rePebble, a brand new Pebble watch that retains all of the popular features and specifications of the original devices. It’ll run the open source PebbleOS, of course, and will be compatible with the existing ecosystem of applications. I’ve never had a Pebble, but there’s no denying the company hit on something valuable, and I know people who still rock their original Pebble devices to this day. The excitement about this announcement is palpable, and I’m pleasantly surprised Google cared enough to work on making an open source PebbleOS a reality (I know of quite a few other companies sitting on deeply loved code and IP rotting away in obscurity). I can’t wait to see what the new device will look like!
On Monday at CES 2025, Nvidia unveiled a desktop computer called Project DIGITS. The machine uses Nvidia’s latest “Blackwell” AI chip and will cost $3,000. It contains a new central processor, or CPU, which Nvidia and MediaTek worked to create. Responding to an analyst’s question during an investor presentation, Huang said Nvidia tapped MediaTek to co-design an energy-efficient CPU that could be sold more widely. “Now they could provide that to us, and they could keep that for themselves and serve the market. And so it was a great win-win,” Huang said. Previously, Reuters reported that Nvidia was working on a CPU for personal computers to challenge the consumer and business computer market dominance of Intel, Advanced Micro Devices and Qualcomm. ↫ Stephen Nellis at Reuters I’ve long wondered why NVIDIA wasn’t entering the general purpose processor market in a more substantial way than it did a few years ago with the Tegra, especially now that ARM has cemented itself as an architecture choice for more than just mobile devices. Much like Intel, AMD, and now Qualcomm, NVIDIA could easily deliver the whole package to laptop, tablet, and desktop makers: processor, chipset, GPU, of course glued together with special NVIDIA magic the other companies opting to use NVIDIA GPUs won’t get. There’s a lot of money to be made there, and it’s the move that could help NVIDIA survive the inevitable crash of the “AI” wave it’s currently riding, which has pushed the company to become one of the most valuable companies in the world. I’m also sure OEMs would love nothing more than to have more than just Qualcomm to choose from for ARM laptops and desktops, if only to aid in bringing costs down through competition, and to potentially offer ARM devices with the same kind of powerful GPUs currently mostly reserved for x86 machines. I’m personally always for more competition, but this time with the asterisk that NVIDIA really doesn’t need to get any bigger than it already is. The company has a long history of screwing over consumers, and I doubt that would change if they also conquered a chunky slice of the general purpose processor market.
So we all know about twisted-pair ethernet, huh? I get a little frustrated with a lot of histories of the topic, like the recent neil breen^w^wserial port video, because they often fail to address some obvious questions about the origin of twisted-pair network cabling. Well, I will fail to answer these as well, because the reality is that these answers have proven very difficult to track down. ↫ J. B. Crawford The problems with nailing down an accurate history of the development of the various standards, ideas, concepts, and implementations of Ethernet and other, by now dead, network standards are their age, as well as the fact that their history is entangled with the even longer history of telephone wiring. The reasoning behind some of the choices made by engineers over the past more than 100 years of telephone technology aren’t always clear, and very difficult to retrace. Crawford dives into some seriously old and fun history here, trying to piece together the origins of twisted pair the best he can. It’s a great read, as all of his writings are.
We’ve all had a good seven years to figure out why our interconnected devices refused to work properly with the HDMI 2.1 specification. The HDMI Forum announced at CES today that it’s time to start considering new headaches. HDMI 2.2 will require new cables for full compatibility, but it has the same physical connectors. Tiny QR codes are suggested to help with that, however. The new specification is named HDMI 2.2, but compatible cables will carry an “Ultra96” marker to indicate that they can carry 96GBps, double the 48 of HDMI 2.1b. The Forum anticipates this will result in higher resolutions and refresh rates and a “next-gen HDMI Fixed Rate Link.” The Forum cited “AR/VR/MR, spatial reality, and light field displays” as benefiting from increased bandwidth, along with medical imaging and machine vision. ↫ Kevin Purdey at Ars Technica I’m sure this will not pose any problems whatsoever, and that no shady no-name manufacturers will abuse this situation at all. DisplayPort is the better standard and connector anyway. No, I will not be taking questions.
Dell has announced it’s rebranding literally its entire product line, so mainstays like XPS, Latitude, and Inspiron are going away. They’re replacing all of these old brands with Dell, Dell Pro, and Dell Pro Max, and within each of these, there will be three tiers: Base, Plus, and Premium. Of course, the reason is “AI”. The AI PC market is quickly evolving. Silicon innovation is at its strongest and everyone from IT decision makers to professionals and everyday users are looking at on-device AI to help drive productivity and creativity. To make finding the right AI PC easy for customers, we’ve introduced three simple product categories to focus on core customer needs – Dell (designed for play, school and work), Dell Pro (designed for professional-grade productivity) and Dell Pro Max (designed for maximum performance). We’ve also made it easy to distinguish products within each of the new product categories. We have a consistent approach to tiering that lets customers pinpoint the exact device for their specific needs. Above and beyond the starting point (Base), there’s a Plus tier that offers the most scalable performance and a Premium tier that delivers the ultimate in mobility and design. ↫ Kevin Terwilliger on Dell’s blog Setting aside the nonsensical reasoning behind the rebrand, I do actually kind of dig the simplicity here. This is a simple, straightforward set of brand names and tiers that pretty much anyone can understand. That being said, the issue with Dell in particular is that once you go to their website to actually buy one of their machines, the clarity abruptly ends and it gets confusing fast. I hope these new brand names and tiers will untangle some of that mess to make it easier to find what you need, but I’m skeptical. My XPS 13 from 2017 is really starting to show its age, and considering how happy I’ve been with it over the years its current Dell equivalent would be a top contender (assuming I had the finances to do so). I wonder if the Linux support on current Dell laptops has improved since my XPS 13 was new?
Do you think streaming platforms and other entities that employ DRM schemes use the TPM in your computer to decrypt stuff? Well, the Free Software Foundation seems to think so, and adds Microsoft’s insistence on requiring a TPM for Windows 11 into the mix, but it turns out that’s simply not true. I’m going to be honest here and say that I don’t know what Microsoft’s actual motivation for requiring a TPM in Windows 11 is. I’ve been talking about TPM stuff for a long time. My job involves writing a lot of TPM code. I think having a TPM enables a number of worthwhile security features. Given the choice, I’d certainly pick a computer with a TPM. But in terms of whether it’s of sufficient value to lock out Windows 11 on hardware with no TPM that would otherwise be able to run it? I’m not sure that’s a worthwhile tradeoff. What I can say is that the FSF’s claim is just 100% wrong, and since this seems to be the sole basis of their overall claim about Microsoft’s strategy here, the argument is pretty significantly undermined. I’m not aware of any streaming media platforms making use of TPMs in any way whatsoever. There is hardware DRM that the media companies use to restrict users, but it’s not in the TPM – it’s in the GPU. ↫ Matthew Garrett A TPM is imply not designed to handle decryption of media streams, and even if they were, they’re far, far too slow and underpowered to decode even a 1080P stream, let alone anything more demanding than that. In reality, DRM schemes like Google’s Widevine, Apple’s Fairplay, and Microsoft’s Playready offer different levels of functionality, both in software and in hardware. The hardware DRM stuff is all done by the GPU, and not by the TPM. By focusing so much on the TPM, Garrett argues, the FSF is failing to see how GPU makers have enabled a ton of hardware DRM without anyone noticing. Personally, I totally understand why organisations like the Free Software Foundation are focusing on TPMs right now. They’re one of the main reasons why people can’t upgrade to Windows 11, it’s the thing people have heard about, and it’s the thing that’ll soon prevent them from getting security updates for their otherwise perfectly fine machines. I’m not sure the FSF has enough clout these days to make any meaningful media impact, especially in more general, non-tech media, but by choosing the TPM as their focus they’re definitely choosing a viable vector. Of course, over here in the tech corner, we don’t like it when people are factually inaccurate or twisting and bending the truth, and I’m glad someone as knowledgeable as Garrett stepped up to set the record straight for us tech-focused people, while everyone else can continue to ignore this matter.
This is the Hall Research Technologies SC-VGA-2, sold as a “VGA/HDTV Video Processor.” In addition to slicing, dicing and pureeing, apparently, it will take any of a bundle of input formats and both rescale and resample them on the fly into the VGA or HDTV signal you desire, including 60Hz rates. This came from a seller specializing in teleprompter equipment and Hall still sells an HDMI version with additional resolutions … for around US$500. However, this or the slightly newer SC-VGA-2A and SC-VGA-2B are all relatively common devices and found substantially cheaper used. Let’s try it out and show some sample output, including those delicious NeXTSTEP system messages and some ST grabs. ↫ Cameron Kaiser With the obscurity of some of the hardware Cameron Kaiser details on his website, I’m not surprised he has some seriously unique needs when it comes to taking screengrabs. He couldn’t very well not take the device apart, and inside it appears to be a system with two small processors, at least one of which is an Intel 8051 8bit microcontroller. Kaiser goes into his usual great detail explaining and showing how the device works. If you’ve got unique screengrabbing needs, this might be of interest to you.
System76, purveyor of Linux computers, distributions, and now also desktop environments, has just unveiled its latest top-end workstation, but this time, it’s not an x86 machine. They’ve been working together with Ampere to build a workstation based around Ampere’s Altra ARM processors: the Thelio Astra. Phoronix, fine purveyor of Linux-focused benchmarks, were lucky enough to benchmark one, and has more information on the new workstation. System76 designed the Thelio Astra in collaboration with Ampere Computing. The System76 Thelio Astra makes use of Ampere Altra processors up to the Ampere Altra Max 128-core ARMv8 processor that in turn supports 8-channel DDR4 ECC memory. The Thelio Astra can be configured with up to 512GB of system memory, choice of Ampere Altra processors, up to NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation graphics, dual 10 Gigabit Ethernet, and up to 16TB of PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD storage. System76 designed the Thelio Astra ARM64 workstation to be complemented by NVIDIA graphics given the pervasiveness of NVIDIA GPUs/accelerators for artificial intelligence and machine learning workloads. The Astra is contained within System76’s custom-designed, in-house-manufactured Thelio chassis. Pricing on the System76 Thelio Astra will start out at $3,299 USD with the 64-core Ampere Altra Q64-22 processor, 2 x 32GB of ECC DDR4-3200 memory, 500GB NVMe SSD, and NVIDIA A402 graphics card. ↫ Michael Larabel This pricing is actually remarkably favourable considering the hardware you’re getting. System76 and its employees have been dropping hints for a while now they were working on an ARM variant of their Thelio workstation, and knowing some of the prices others are asking, I definitely expected the base price to hit $5000, so this is a pleasant surprise. With the Altra processors getting a tiny bit long in the tooth, you do notice some oddities here, specifically the DDR4 RAM instead of the modern DDR5, as well as the lack of PCIe 5.0. The problem is that while the Altra has a successor in the AmpereOne processor, its availability is quite limited, and most of them probably end up in datacentres and expensive servers for big tech companies. This newer variant does come with DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 support, but doesn’t yet have a lower core count version, so even if it were readily available it might simply push the price too far up. Regardless, the Altra is still a ridiculously powerful processor, and at anywhere between 64 and 128 cores, it’s got power to spare. The Thelio Astra will be available come 12 November, and while I would perform a considerable number of eyebrow-raising acts to get my hands on one, it’s unlikely System76 will ship one over for a review. Edit: here’s an excellent and detailed reply to our Mastodon account from an owner of an Ampere Altra workstation, highlighting some of the challenges related to your choice of GPU. Required reading if you’re interested in a machine like this.
Something odd happened to Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Dev Kit, an $899 mini PC powered by Windows 11 and the company’s latest Snapdragon X Elite processor. Qualcomm decided to abruptly discontinue the product, refund all orders (including for those with units on hand), and cease its support, claiming the device “has not met our usual standards of excellence.” ↫ Taras Buria at Neowin The launch of the Snapdragon X Pro and Elite chips seems to have mostly progressed well, but there have been a few hiccups for those of us who want ARM but aren’t interested in Windows and/or laptops. There’s this story, which is just odd all around, with an announced, sold, and even shipped product suddenly taken off the market, which I think at this point was the only non-laptop device with an X Elite or Pro chip. If you are interested in developing for Qualcomm’s new platform, but don’t want a laptop, you’re out of luck for now. Another note is that the SoC SKU in the Dev Kit was clocked a tiny bit higher than the laptop SKUs, which perhaps plays a role in its cancellation. The bigger hiccup is the problematic Linux bring-up, which is posing many more problems and is taking a lot longer than Qualcomm very publicly promised it would take. For now, if you want to run Linux on a Snapdragon X Elite or Pro device, you’re going to need a custom version of your distribution of choice, tailored to a specific laptop model, using a custom kernel. It’s an absolute mess and basically means that at this point in time, months and months after release, buying one of these to run Linux on them is a bad idea. Quite a few important bits will arrive with Linux 6.12 to supposedly greatly improve the experience, but seeing is believing. Qualcomm made a lot of grandiose promises about Linux support, and they simply haven’t delivered.
If you read my previous article on DOS memory models, you may have dismissed everything I wrote as “legacy cruft from the 1990s that nobody cares about any longer”. After all, computers have evolved from sporting 8-bit processors to 64-bit processors and, on the way, the amount of memory that these computers can leverage has grown orders of magnitude: the 8086, a 16-bit machine with a 20-bit address space, could only use 1MB of memory while today’s 64-bit machines can theoretically access 16EB. All of this growth has been in service of ever-growing programs. But… even if programs are now more sophisticated than they were before, do they all really require access to a 64-bit address space? Has the growth from 8 to 64 bits been a net positive in performance terms? Let’s try to answer those questions to find some very surprising answers. But first, some theory. ↫ Julio Merino It’s not quite weekend yet, but I’m still calling this some light reading for the weekend.
In 1999, some members from the MMC Association decided to split and create SD Association. But nobody seems to exactly know why. ↫ sdomi’s webpage I don’t even know how to summarise any of this research, because it’s not only a lot of information, it’s also deeply bureaucratic and boring – it takes a certain kind of person to enjoy this sort of stuff, and I happen to fit the bill. This is a great read.
Earlier this year, I reviewed the excellent and unique MNT Reform laptop, an (almost) fully open source, very hackable laptop. MNT has just unveiled the upcoming follow-up to the Reform, called the Reform Next. Being highly performant, modular, and upgradeable, MNT Reform Next gives you more freedom than any other laptop. Swap modules, print your own case, customize your keyboard. Since we are committed to open hardware, all sources are public. While Classic MNT Reform is a portable device, we felt like a sleeker, more lightweight design would increase portability and make for a more flexible laptop. ↫ MNT website The focus seems to have been on both performance and size, and I think the latter is especially important for a lot of people who might not have been too enamored with the original Reform’s chunky, brutalist design. The device has been made thinner by splitting the motherboard up into several connected, separate boards, that also happen to improve the repairability and upgradeability of the device. The battery pack has been redesigned for a smaller physical size, too, and the trackball option is no longer available – it’s trackpad-only. The Reform Next is compatible with MNT’s latest processor module, the RK3588, and as such, packs a bigger punch. This SoC has four ARM Cortex-A76 cores up to 2.4 Ghz, and four power-efficient ARM Cortex-A55 cores up to 1.5 Ghz. This SoC is also available as an upgrade for the MNT Reform and the MNT Pocket Reform, and ships with either 16 or 32 GB of RAM and an ARM Mali G610 MP4 GPU. Of course, the Reform Next will be as open as humanly possible, both software as well as hardware-wise, and it’s looking like a worthy successor to the MNT Reform. I’m incredibly delighted that MNT seems to have found a niche that works for them, and enabling them to keep developing and releasing hardware that goes against every trend in the industry, giving us entirely unique devices nobody else is making.
Paul Weissmann’s OpenPA, the invaluable archive on anything related to the HP’s PA-RISC architecture, devices, and operating systems, has branched off for a bit and started collecting information on RISC laptops. Technical computing in the 1990s was mostly done on RISC workstations with Unix operating systems and specialized applications. For mobile use cases, some of the popular RISC vendors built RISC Laptops for mobile Unix use in the 1990s. Often based on contemporary Unix workstations, these RISC laptops were often marketed for government and military uses such as command, technical analysis and surveillance. ↫ Paul Weissmann at OpenPA OpenPA has always had content beyond just PA-RISC (like HP’s Itanium machines), so this is not entirely surprising, and it also happens to be something that’s sorely needed – there’s remarkably little consolidated information to be found on these RISC laptops, and it’s usually scattered all over the place and difficult to find. They were expensive and rare when they were new, and they’re even rarer and often more expensive today. What we’re talking about here are laptops with PA-RISC, SPARC, (non-Apple) PowerPC, and Alpha processors, running some variant of UNIX, like HP-UX, SunOS/Solaris, AIX, and even Windows NT. A particularly interesting listing at the moment is the Hitachi 3050RX/100C, a laptop based on the Hitachi PA/50L PA-RISC processor that ran something called HI-UX/WE2, a UNIX from Hitachi I can’t find much information about. The most desirable laptop listed is the amazing Tadpole Viper, which was the most powerful SPARC laptop Tadpole ever made, and I’m pretty sure it’s the most powerful SPARC laptop, period. It was powered by a 1.2Ghz UltraSPARC IIIi processor, and was also sold as the Sun Ultra 3, in 2005. I would perform some seriously questionable acts to get my hands on one of these, but they’re most likely virtually impossible to find. Anyone who can help Weissmann find more information – feel free to do so.
