Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

First Desktop Computer To Use Intel's XScale 184

Ian Chamberlain writes "Drobe, the leading RISC OS portal, has reported the release of Iyonix, the first desktop computer to use Intel's XScale processor. The XScale is now famous for its increasingly widespread use in PDA devices, used because of its low power consumption and high performance processing. The Iyonix runs a new 32bit version of RISC OS, the operating system orginally developed by Acorn, but now owned by Pace." The same site links to a pair of reviews (one translated from heise.de) of this machine. RISC OS is also what powers the solar PC mentioned a few months ago.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

First Desktop Computer To Use Intel's XScale

Comments Filter:
  • Intel Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by L3WKW4RM ( 228924 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:20PM (#4834270) Homepage
    Intel's XScale site is here: http://www.intel.com/design/intelxscale/ [intel.com]
  • Chopped links? (Score:4, Informative)

    by MagPulse ( 316 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:24PM (#4834293)
    Here's the XScale link [intel.com] and the Solar PC link [slashdot.org].
  • "high performance" (Score:2, Informative)

    by ignorant_newbie ( 104175 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:36PM (#4834345) Homepage
    >XScale is now famous for its increasingly widespread
    >use in PDA devices, used because of its low power
    >consumption and high performance processing.

    um... this must explain why my inbox is full of messages from Sean at thekompany.com about how crappy the performance of the new Zaurus is.
  • Re:I don't get it... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:38PM (#4834350)
    The Iyonix is a good choice for someone who wants to run RISC OS faster than possible before. RISC OS is another alternative OS to MacOS, Windows and Linux, and is the OS of choice for quite a few.

    The Iyonix contains mostly PC hardware and it's fairly obvious the XScale won't be able to beat a P4/G4 in terms of raw speed. But, you'd be hard-pressed getting RISC OS to run faster on any other piece of hardware.

    --
    Simon Wilson, Boulder, Colorado
  • Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Jonathan ( 5011 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:50PM (#4834392) Homepage
    You have to understand the British. RISC-PC fans are at least as fanatical as Amiga fans are. There is a market, believe it or not.
  • it looks like (Score:4, Informative)

    by foonf ( 447461 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @05:53PM (#4834399) Homepage
    Based on the image of the motherboard here [iyonix.com] this box looks to use a standard ATX-factor motherboard (aside from the "podule" bays and rear port arrangement, anyhow). Anybody know who makes the board, and if they are available separately? I don't think I would pay over 2000 bucks for a whole system, but since it uses pretty typical PC hardware, if the board were available for a reasonable price (even "reasonable" like the $500 for some of the open PPC boards) it would be a cool alternative to the x86 orthodoxy, even if its somewhat slow by modern standards (especially in light of the fact that it should be trivial to get NetBSD and probably Linux running on it).
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:00PM (#4834422)
    Acorn was a British computer company which was more or less dissolved a couple of years ago.
    They designed and released the BBC computer for BBC TV corp. in the early 1980s for their "The Computer" television series. It was like the Commodore 64, only better... Definently the best mass-market desktop computer of the age.
    Acorn then moved on to thinking about their next-generation computing system. They found the 80286 and 68000 too slow and expensive for their tastes, and instead did the foolhardy thing of designing their own R.I.S.C. CPU - the ARM (XScale is an evolution of the ARM, like how the P4 is an evolution of the 386). ARM CPUs typically use amazingly small amounts of electricity, and run up to several times faster than an X86 cpu at the same mhz.
    In (I think) 1987, after having been bought by Olivetie (an Italian electronics company), Acorn released their first Arm based system. Over the next couple of years, this evolved into the RISC Operating System / ARM computer platform, which was relatively popular, especially in schools, in the UK, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Germany, and parts of Canada and Mexico. RISCOS/Arm is virtually unheard of in the US, but it was an important platform once. In 1998 my high school had mainly Acorn computers (and my school in 1996 was still using Acorn BBCs).
    Acorn arguabily suffered from mismanagement in the 1990s, and failed to properly market and give direction to their system. The company decided to stop producing Acorn computers in late 1998 (a fast new yellow G4-cube-like computer - the Phoebie was in late development at the time) on the belief that the next big thing would be set-top boxes and the like. Of course they got it all wrong, and Acorn more or less went down the plughole and was subsequently renamed "Element 14" (huh?) which means Silicon, then merged into some forgettable company.
    Luckily the ARM-cpu-producing division was held as a seperate company and survived... ARM cpus are widely used in certain areas. Last weekend when I was at a computer shop, they had a whole range of ARM based PDAs.
    RISCOS was licenced to Pace. I don't know the whole story, but I think Pace managed to hire some of the Acorn staff.
    RISCOS is ultra-fast, tiny (several megabytes), runs from ROM for bootup speeds which put BeOS to shame, easy to program for, easy to use so long as you can understand its weird 3-mouse buttoned gui, and still has a userbase of maybe several hundred thousand.
    Linux can be run on Acorn systems too.
    There are usergroups, Acorn computer fairs, and companies dedicated to the Acorn platform in the UK. It isn't going to go away any time soon. This is why they've put together this Lyonix computer, and a couple of other companies are putting their own Acorn clones too.
    If you're wondering why it is the price it is, well they're coving themselves because low-production-run motherboards are highly expensive to produce. My guess would be there'll be substancial price-drops for new RISCOS/ARM systems within a year when they can be more certain of production numbers, and competition arrives on the scene.
    There is alot of freeware and educational software available for RISCOS. A commercial game called "Tek" was released for Riscos recently.

    Btw, is there anyone in the US using RISCO? If you are, I bet you weird out all your friends ;)
  • Re:why?? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:04PM (#4834438)
    Both you and the person who moderated your post to +1 insightful have no idea about what you're talking.

    That the Xscale just happens to be designed to be low-power is not the reason why they chose it.
    This computer is being sold because it runs RiscOS, an OS developed in the UK and still used by many people. RiscOS only runs on ARM CPUs, and the Xscale happens to be an ARM CPU.
  • by sql*kitten ( 1359 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:30PM (#4834540)
    You know the first question 'the public' will have is... "...but does it run Windows?"

    Or more accurately, does it have any useful applications? Without applications, the greatest CPU and the greatest OS in the world are only of interest to Slashbots. If it's aimed at consumers, it's got to have Office and it's got to run games. If it's targeted at business, it's also got to have Office, and it's got to have the relevant vertical market applications. If it's targeted at workstation users, it's got to have CAD/CAM software or whatever.

    Without these, it's dead before it's even launched. Be should have taught you that.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:31PM (#4834546)
    LOL, amazng how you get modded up for such a post. The computer uses an XScale so it can run RISC OS, which only runs on ARM processors. That's the reason.

    You can easily rip out the guts and put the mobo it comes with into a much nicer case. Done.

    I seriously doubt these machines beating an XScale machine for power consumption. See the heatsinks on the Mini-ITX processors? See the lack of ANY heatsinks in the Iyonix pictures?

    Told.
  • by anjackson ( 631897 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:34PM (#4834568) Homepage
    Well, as one of the nostalgics I have to admit there is a fairly resounding ring of truth to your question of whether we are just trying to revive old memories. Having said that, I use RISC OS every day , for web development and DTP/design tasks. Maybe I can explain why. I have a fairly new (800Mhz Duron) Win2k/Linux machine and a rather elderly (40Mhz[!] ARM710) Risc PC. There is nothing I can do on the Risc PC that I cannot to on the other (the reverse, I'm afraid, is by no means true). However, there is very little that I would not rather do on the Risc PC. This is mostly learned behaviour of course, but I still insist that RISC OS is very pleasant to use. Its a remarkably efficient GUI which, despite running on a chip that is 20 times slower (in MHz) than my Linux box, feels only slightly less responsive. High-quality software (e.g. Cerilica's Vantage [cerilica.com], one of the flagship apps) tends to be somewhat cheaper than 'equivalent' software elsewhere. The GUI is consistent across almost all applications. It doesn't try to hide the system file structure, but instead uses a structure that is fairly simple to understand. Since around 1990 it has had a better anti-aliased font renderer that I have seem on any other platform (does any other system use hinting?). Just lots of little things really. There are of course lots of downsides, and we have only survived at all because Pace have taken advantage of RISC OS's stability and used it to run TV set-top boxes. The number of users probably barely crests 10,000 and so the hardware is expensive. There are big gaps concerning e.g. Linux software compatability and Java. Nevertheless, I will buy one.
  • Re:why?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by anjackson ( 631897 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:40PM (#4834595) Homepage
    RISC OS has already been emulated - see Virtual Acorn [virtualacorn.co.uk]. It runs at a reasonable speed on most modern PC hardware, but lacks some important functionality, so I'll be sticking to my Risc PC for now.
  • Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)

    by beebware ( 149208 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @06:48PM (#4834625) Homepage
    RISC PC's are used to produce the computer graphics for "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" throughout the world: and I believe they are being used on many other programs (but that is one of the 'highest profile' ones).
  • dc appliances (Score:3, Informative)

    by zogger ( 617870 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @08:01PM (#4834901) Homepage Journal
    --check it oput sometime, you can get 12 vdc and 24 vdc appliances. A lot of times as close as your nearest marina boat store or RV place. We keep trying to gradually change over to all dc appliances, or if they were already dc to get better ones. Example, we had 12 volt incadescents, we switched to fluorescents. Next step is LED strip lighting. The vacuum cleaner, switched from a 110 AC to a smallish but still "good enough" 12 volt vac I found, a small step up from a normal car vac. Our tvs are 12 volt, but the color/vcr combo one crapped out on the dc part so had to switch that one back to AC, (well, that's for the girlfriend here, she's the movie nut), I have a small 12 vdc black and white I use whenever I really want to follow a breaking news story as I sit at the computer. I've got laptops and desktops, but this project I just thunked up is intriguing me now, laptops just got too small of a screen, and 99.99% of the time they sit around for me as a desktop, so I just use the energy hog desktop so I can have a bigger monitor. I know I could run the monitor from the laptop, but the desktop is a bigger better computer.

    If this littlepc was cheaper-down to 500$ maybe- I'd consider it, but a grand right now..well..guess I'd still go a hundred bucks more and get an iBook. I mean, you still need to get the LCD monitor, and they *ain't* cheap.

    As to the solar itself, going on 4 years now for us, my only regret is not doing it a decade earlier. I'd encourzge anyone to at least start on it, decent battery bank storage, a panel or two and a charge controller and possibly an inverter. I'd size the components in advance so you could add extra PV panels as you want to and can afford it. I'd start with the solar rig running the computer in the home as it makes a *nifty* UPS system, beats the pants off buying a dedicated UPS. all ya got to do is check the battery size difference, heh, my "backup" batteries would run this desktop for days and days without any solar input from a decent full charge. Also note this last ice storm, millions still without ANY power. Having guaranteed SOME all the time is a lot better than ZERO when you really WANT some power.
  • by Jon Chatow ( 25684 ) <slashdot@jdforrester.org> on Saturday December 07, 2002 @08:07PM (#4834922) Homepage
    ... is the best in the world. It's wonderful, superb, fantastic, beautiful. By far the best assembler I've ever used (I've used 68k, PPC, x86, PIC, ZX80 and 6502, and perhaps some more). And RiscOS is/was a fantastic OS (font anti-aliasing from the late '80s, etc.), with the best editor ever [tartarus.org], which is currently nearly completely ported to 32-bit status.
  • by jd678 ( 577145 ) on Saturday December 07, 2002 @08:26PM (#4834986)
    Just a couple of additions to do with the processor and early ARM processors. It was originally called the Acorn Risc Machine, however in 1990 it was spun off into a seperate company known as Advanced Risc Machines, owned 40% by VLSI, 40% by Apple, and 20% by Acorn. Apple then went on to use this processor in the Newton.

    What they did in producing the processor was incredible, they had a working RISC processor, running at the time very quick, and with minimal man-hours of developemend, it was something like 10 man years, unheard of at the time for a new processor. Some of the features like a full 32bit shift being available without using another clock cycle have yet to be surpassed. It was true RISC, at a time when other RISC chips had something like 60-80 instructions, this made do with just 44 - there wasn't even any instruction for divide, and the concept of subroutines and return was done purely in programming as opposed to calling functions of the processor.

    As far as the OS, the version on release was the very undeveloped Arthur, and RISC OS was released late 1988 as it's much better replacement. At the time, there was full (cooperative however) multitasking Windowing system, with 256 colours, and was much better than anything else on the market.

  • Re:Why? (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 07, 2002 @08:51PM (#4835081)
    I use mine for developing all my software (e.g. DansGuardian, SmoothGuardian, etc):

    http://dansguardian.org/?page=requirements [dansguardian.org]

    http://www.smoothwall.co.uk/corporate/bios.html [smoothwall.co.uk]


    I also use it for all my web browsing, email, and so on. I use it commercially and as a hobby.

  • Re:why?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by stevarooski ( 121971 ) on Sunday December 08, 2002 @05:42AM (#4836777) Homepage
    AFAIK, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible to emulate RISC processors on the x86 architecture.

    I don't think this is true at all. If anything, its easier to emulate a RISC processor than CISC.

    As for some examples to back this up, MIPS chips have been successfully emulated for years--SPIM and XSPIM come to mind. This is also true for the playstation (which runs a MIPS chip, more or less). Check out Bleem. A lot of Palm development is done via emulator (POSE, which kicks ass); I believe the dragonball is a RISC chip.

    Not trying to be asinine or know-it-all, just adding to an otherwise good post. :)
  • Re:why?? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ed Avis ( 5917 ) <ed@membled.com> on Sunday December 08, 2002 @06:24AM (#4836892) Homepage
    Why bother with that emulator when Arcem [sourceforge.net] is pretty fast and GPLed. You just need a suitable RISC OS ROM image...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 08, 2002 @09:09AM (#4837175)
    There are reasons enough why I will not buy the Iyonix while there are two generations of Risc Os machines still in use here. But there are still reasons enough to use the old machines. Most of them because it is the best GUI around. Try the Virtual Acorn or Red Squirrel emulations on a Windows system and you will know on what level Risc Os was 7/8 years ago. The speed will not be comparable to a Iyonix of course. And when you are a Linux user then try the ROX GUI that is based on Risc Os. It will however not have the nice antialiased font system that Risc Os has for 12 years now. Microsoft licensed the rendering system years ago and wasn't able to implant it as good as Risc Os has it. Intel has ARM licenses for the StrongARM and X-scale. It doesn't happen often that US IT companies take licenses from foreign companies to improve their own products.
    From tiny Acorns grow mighty oaks, the Acorn itself is no longer there.

This file will self-destruct in five minutes.

Working...