Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Intel Hardware

Intel Rolls Out Raspberry Pi Competitor 214

Posted by Soulskill
from the minnows-are-a-pie's-natural-predator dept.
Rambo Tribble writes "As detailed by Ars Technica, Intel has introduced the Minnowboard, an SBC touted as more powerful and more open than the Raspberry Pi. At $199, it is also more expensive. Using an Atom processor, the new SBC boasts more capacity and x86-compatibility. 'It's notable that the MinnowBoard is an open hardware platform, a distinction that Arduino and BeagleBone can claim but Raspberry Pi cannot. Users could create their own MinnowBoards by buying the items on the bill of materials—all the design information is published, and CircuitCo chose components that can be purchased individually rather than in the bulk quantities hardware manufacturers are accustomed to, Anders said. Users can also buy a pre-made MinnowBoard and make customizations or create their own accessory boards to expand its capability. And being an open hardware platform means that the source code of (almost) all the software required to run the platform is open.'" Update: 09/20 22:31 GMT by T : Look soon for a video introduction to the MinnowBoard, and — hopefully not too long from now — a visit to their Dallas-area production facility.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Rolls Out Raspberry Pi Competitor

Comments Filter:
  • by jandrese (485) <kensama@vt.edu> on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:27AM (#44903985) Homepage Journal
    Why is this thing priced like a modern board when it has all out of date components on it? Wake me up when they do the Bay Trail version or slash $100 off of the asking price.
    • by gl4ss (559668) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:29AM (#44904013) Homepage Journal

      yeah it certainly isn't a raspberry pi competitor. why buy this when you can buy a netbook for almost the same price??

      and check this out, 8 gpio pins. whee... no idea if any da/ad pins.

      • by Nerdfest (867930) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:31AM (#44904047)

        They're trying to do to the Raspberry Pi what Microsoft did to the netbook, and for the same reasons.

        • by citizenr (871508) on Friday September 20, 2013 @02:50PM (#44906603) Homepage

          and they are doing it using same method M$ used coming up with WinRT and losing $1 billion in the process

        • by Goaway (82658)

          There are plenty of higher-performance single board computers in this price class. Cheaper, even. This is just one more, with perhaps slightly better performance.

      • by ShanghaiBill (739463) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:56AM (#44904395)

        yeah it certainly isn't a raspberry pi competitor. why buy this when you can buy a netbook for almost the same price??

        Also, this thing is huge. Several times the size of a Raspberry Pi. It appears to require a wall wart, whereas a RPI can be powered from USB.

        and check this out, 8 gpio pins. whee... no idea if any da/ad pins.

        ... and none of the GPIO pins can do hardware PWM. So this board is not much use for robotics.

      • by unixisc (2429386)
        Yeah, let Intel put out something @ $40, and then it may be worth a discussion
    • by bobbied (2522392)

      Hey, engineers to spin up this board got to eat you know. Their hours don't come cheap these days. I'm guessing this *won't* have much impact on PI sales. There are a bunch of hobbyist cards out there, and many existed before the PI. PI's claim to fame is that it is CHEAP.... And it lives up to that goal..

      • PI's claim to fame is that it is CHEAP

        And that it's small
        And that it sips power
        And that it can interface with robotics sensors
        ...

    • It's basically an MCU eval board: low PCB runs, low quantity orders for every part in the BOM, very generic capabilities. EVBs are expensive. Sure, the engineering time that goes into it is pricey, but on a per-unit basis it's the fact that these are very general-use, quasi-custom toys that increases the cost.

      • ..and I just looked in earnest at the capabilities. It's basically a caseless computer. Which is ALSO an eval board. Which means that $200 seems pretty reasonable, really.

        • by jedidiah (1196) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:46AM (#44904235) Homepage

          pppppffft!

          For $200 I can get a ready made Atom with an Nvidia GPU.

          This board is worse than useless. It's insulting.

          • by ackthpt (218170)

            pppppffft!

            For $200 I can get a ready made Atom with an Nvidia GPU.

            This board is worse than useless. It's insulting.

            Yeah, I know, this reply x1,000. It's almost like they held a secret meeting with Ballmer up in Redmond and agreed they could nudge the Wintel syndicate in on Raspberry Pi turf.

            It will have its niche. Someone will find a use for it somewhere.

            • It costs more then a Celeron NUC, which actually has cool features like full virtualization support.
          • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:59AM (#44904433) Journal
            The one thing that might prove interesting is that it is allegedly fullly open (aside from the PowerVR GPU drivers) which (assuming Intel isn't lying or using "'Open' as in a block of magic numbers" definitions, this board, although based on UEFI, might actually be the first Intel product in quite a while to be well documented enough to be a Coreboot/LinuxBIOS target. Even better, it might provide insight into some other products using the same chipsets.
          • So. . .you're not imagining a Beowulf Cluster of those. . .
          • Yeah, you can buy a chromebook for that knid of money. And the cb comes with a case. I'll keep using the raspberry or the beagleboard, thanks anyway Intel.
    • Why is this thing priced like a modern board when it has all out of date components on it? Wake me up when they do the Bay Trail version or slash $100 off of the asking price.

      The GMA600 is a real shit sandwich (Oh, sure, I really really want to fuck around with a PowerVR SGX545 and it's utterly shit proprietary driver on my 'open' dev board); but $200 is a steal by the standards of x86 boards designed for embedded purposes (I suspect that there are a bunch of PC/104-format users looking enviously at this board right now, and wondering why Intel didn't answer their prayers instead).

      Now, given the prices of Intel's own faster, better, comes-with-case, consumer offerings (their

      • by fnj (64210)

        $200 is a steal by the standards of x86 boards designed for embedded purposes

        Maybe that is why Arm boards are cleaning up. Who the fuck cares about x86; you're going to program it in C anyway. Let's face it, the price of this piece of shit is mortally insulting in any context.

      • but $200 is a steal by the standards of x86 boards designed for embedded purposes

        What? I've been buying mini-ITX boards for embedded work, with first C7's then Atoms for $100-$129 for five years now, some even with a built-in DC regulator. And the only thing I hate about the Atom boards is the PowerVR GPU's.

        Yeah, it's not PC/104, but if cost is the primary factor, PC/104 isn't that relevant.

        At $50 it might be a RPi competitor, but at $199 I don't know who the target market could be.

    • It also gave me cold shivers when I saw the GPU spec. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] the GMA600 really is just that old stupid PowerVR core with the clock cranked to 2x speed. At least it supports programmable shaders, hooray. But I think I'm done torturing myself with the old world GMA crap-chips. No thanks.
    • by dbc (135354) on Friday September 20, 2013 @12:20PM (#44904669)

      So, do you guys have multiple Beagle Boards, Beagle Bones, Ras Pi's, and other sitting on your bench right now? And you have experience using them? I do.

      You haven't looked closely at the Minnow. The I/O is much easier to use and much richer than you find on a 'bone or a raspi. The CPU has more horsepower, and yon don't have porting headaches to get reasonable things running on it. $200 seems like a good value to me. You can't compare a raspi to a minnow until you try to hook up a CAN bus and a camera and start doing vision processing and motor control like you need for a robotics application. The pi will be straining. I have hopes for the minnow.

      First, post your benchmarks, and BOM for all the add-on you needed to make it work. Then you can grouse about the price.

      • by mjwalshe (1680392)
        it should be at almost 10 times the price
      • by Obfuscant (592200) on Friday September 20, 2013 @01:39PM (#44905731)

        So, do you guys have multiple Beagle Boards, Beagle Bones, Ras Pi's, and other sitting on your bench right now? And you have experience using them? I do.

        I have nothing Beagle (too expensive), but I have lots of Pis, both on my desk and out in the field doing productive work.

        You haven't looked closely at the Minnow.

        Considering that the news just got here about the Minnow, no, I haven't "looked closely" at it. I've read the fine article about it, however.

        The I/O is much easier to use and much richer than you find on a 'bone or a raspi.

        Richer as in "costs more", yes. The Pis I have have the hardware I need to do the job I bought them for. Putting lots of extra stuff on them would only raise the price.

        The CPU has more horsepower, and yon don't have porting headaches to get reasonable things running on it.

        The Pi appears to be able to be overclocked to 1GHz, although I haven't tried, and have no need to. I've had no problem porting the things I needed to port, I just copied the source code and compiled it. Well, the PC I developed the code on had a real serial port and the Pi doesn't, so I had to change the value of one constant from "/dev/ttyS0" to "/dev/ttyUSB0". Is that what you call "porting headaches"?

        On the other hand, the PC didn't have hardware PWM, so if I used the PC I would have to come up with on outboard hardware solution to get the steady PWM signal I need.

        You can't compare a raspi to a minnow until you try to hook up a CAN bus and a camera and start doing vision processing and motor control like you need for a robotics application.

        I wasn't aware that a CAN bus was a requirement for robotics. I thought servos made use of PWM signals. As for cameras, the Pi has a hardware camera. I haven't used it yet, but that's next on the list of things to do. Other people seem to be doing vision processing with it, so I'm sure that mine will do it eventually, too.

        If you're concerned that the Pi has only one (AFAIK) hardware PWM channel (wait, it has two, doesn't it?), well, for the price of one Minnow you can get 6 Pis and they call all dedicate themselves to that one channel and not have to time share or suffer from task switching glitches. Hardware PWM beats the hottest Intel CPU doing bit-banging every day of the week, and twice on Saturday.

        The headline on this article and on the Ars one is misleading. From what they quoted of the Intel spokesman, this is not intended to be a Pi competitor. They didn't say that. It's an open source/open hardware solution. But their justification is a tad off, I think. This board is aimed at developers who would pay $1000 for a development system -- and they don't say why anyone would pay $1000 for a development system when you could develop on the board itself.

        The most amazing quote is this. This board uses old hardware because "We used an older one to get our feet wet, so to speak, and understand the design." In other words, Intel was not comfortable designing things with their current generation of CPU and glue, even though they are mass producing them and selling them to others. And the bit about this being an "open system"? Interesting that the major closed component on the Pi is the GPU, which is ALSO closed on the Minnow.

        eSATA, PCIe, Gig-E? Because the Pi doesn't have that you can't use it as a file server or network appliance? Hmmm. So even though I can hook a few Tb of disk up to the Pi via USB, I can't use that as a file server? I can't hook up a temperature sensor or three to the Pi and hook it to the network and have a network appliance that measures temperature for me? The truth is, the Pi makes a fine file server or network appliance, it just won't be enterprise grade at either one or be really fast. No True Scotsman would have a USB disk on a fileserver, I guess.

        • by chihowa (366380) on Friday September 20, 2013 @02:11PM (#44906195)

          I have nothing Beagle (too expensive), but I have lots of Pis, both on my desk and out in the field doing productive work.

          I'd like to jump in and recommend trying out the Beaglebone Black. At $45, it's not much more than the Pi, and feels like what the Raspberry Pi should have been. It's much more stable (and uses less power!), has on-chip ethernet (avoiding horrible USB related problems that the Pi has), isn't plagued with USB issues and generally has better specs. Interfacing stuff to the Beaglebone is a dream, compared to the Pi, with more hardware supported modes and real analog pins.

          Since finding the Beaglebone and the Black, my flaky old Pis get used much less often. Admittedly, I'm using these as embedded controllers for instruments and not as a media center. I'm not sure how the Black does in that area.

        • by dbc (135354)

          So, do you guys have multiple Beagle Boards, Beagle Bones, Ras Pi's, and other sitting on your bench right now? And you have experience using them? I do.

          I have nothing Beagle (too expensive), but I have lots of Pis, both on my desk and out in the field doing productive work.

          Take a look at Beagle Bone Black.

          You haven't looked closely at the Minnow.

          Considering that the news just got here about the Minnow, no, I haven't "looked closely" at it. I've read the fine article about it, however.

          If you count on SlashDot to keep you informed about embedded electronics you are about 9 months behind the rest of us. The minnow has been shown around as prototype hardware for at least 6 to 9 months.

          The I/O is much easier to use and much richer than you find on a 'bone or a raspi.

          The Pi appears to be able to be overclocked to 1GHz, although I haven't tried, and have no need to. I've had no problem porting the things I needed to port, I just copied the source code and compiled it. Well, the PC I developed the code on had a real serial port and the Pi doesn't, so I had to change the value of one constant from "/dev/ttyS0" to "/dev/ttyUSB0". Is that what you call "porting headaches"?

          No, I'm thinking of ROS and OpenCV. Which the ROS foundation is supporting BTW, but without them putting in a man-year or so on top of community effort, ROS on a raspi would not be as close to running as it is.

          You can't compare a raspi to a minnow until you try to hook up a CAN bus and a camera and start doing vision processing and motor control like you need for a robotics application.

          I wasn't aware that a CAN bus was a requirement for robotics. I thought servos made use of PWM signals.

          R/C servos, sure. That's what high school kids use to get started

      • by Guspaz (556486)

        Then as a serious question, how does this thing compare to existing embedded Atom or NUC boards? There's a Celeron NUC kit out there for $180ish and it's smaller than the Minnow to boot. There are also lots of fanless Pico-ITX boards with Intel chips.

    • by pla (258480) on Friday September 20, 2013 @12:27PM (#44904747) Journal
      Why is this thing priced like a modern board when it has all out of date components on it? Wake me up when they do the Bay Trail version or slash $100 off of the asking price.

      Intel seems to have totally missed the mark on this one. People don't buy the Raspberry Pi because they want a desktop PC in an awkward form factor. They buy the RPi because they want a tiny general purpose computing device that sips power and costs so little as to consider it disposable.

      The Minnow completely fails on all but one of those criteria - It costs 8x as much, has a 60% larger footprint (almost the size of a NanoITX board!), the CPU alone draws up to 4W (not even counting everything else on the board) vs the Pi's 2.5W total...

      If anything, I would have to suspect Intel means to target this as a semi-embedded Epia/Jetway/ECS killer - Though even there, it costs more, still has a larger footprint than readily-available Pico-ITX boards, and lacks the standardized mechanical aspects (ie, mounting holes) you get with the ITX family.

      DOA. Simple as that. You can already get more computer for less money, and less computer for a LOT less money.
    • Slash $150 off it before I even consider it.
    • by thsths (31372)

      Indeed - I can get an HP microserver for less, complete with case, power supply, and a boot drive.

      I think Intel has an advantage when it comes to throughput or computing power, but realistically the Atom is not really that impressive, certainly not at this price.

    • Hey kids! Why are you messing with those science-projects from the Bell Labs gang? C'mon! RSTS is the established and serious way to compute. We think you'll find that our shareholders appreciate the value provided by our additional cost.

    • by hairyfeet (841228)

      Yeah no crap, AMD put out their own X86 micro last year (sorry I can't find the link, my Google Fu is off ATM) and at $199 it had a 64bit OOO Bobcat APU with a Radeon GPU powerful enough to do 1080p. This thing literally looks like its made from the chips that Intel couldn't sell and the price just adds insult to injury. At least the Bobcat held 4GB of RAM and had enough graphical muscle to be used for most video tasks. I have one of the E350s and with fast memory you can even do some halfway decent gaming

  • Skipper! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Sponge Bath (413667) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:31AM (#44904035)

    Just sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
    a tale of a fateful trip.
    They started with a project board,
    using Intel's tiny chip.

    • I'm pretty sure this one ends with Gilligan's hat floating on a pool of quicksand.
    • Ooh! I know how this one turns out... Hint: IBM -1 char each = HAL

  • Open? (Score:3, Informative)

    by DogGuts (658827) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:31AM (#44904049)
    > ...There's just one exception: with the graphics processing unit, only the binary files required to drive the GPU are available, as the source code remains closed...
    nuf said...
    • by bobbied (2522392)

      Same situation with the PI if I remember correctly...

      • by Hatta (162192)

        Yes, the Pi is not open hardware either. As it stands, there is no actual open hardware.

        • Arduino
          • by bobbied (2522392)

            Well... True in a way, but I thought we where discussing Linux based platforms..

            I don't think you are going to install Linux on an Arduino, even the Due is going to be pretty limited given the memory available is measured in Kilo Bytes...

    • Strange because the open driver for Intel GPU stuff on Linux stuff is pretty good... at least it works well, I mean.
  • by raymorris (2726007) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:40AM (#44904161)

    It just costs ten times as much and lacks the same capabilities.
    Other than the fact that it's a completely different class of product ...

  • by wiredlogic (135348) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:44AM (#44904215)

    It's notable that the MinnowBoard is an open hardware platform, a distinction that Arduino and BeagleBone can claim but Raspberry Pi cannot.

    There's nothing exotic about a Pi. It could be recreated with sufficient motivation. The schematics are available so it wouldn't be a major challenge to reproduce them and generate a compatible board layout.

    Also, the average homebrew builder targeted by these products isn't going to have the resources to assemble a board with high density surface mount packages so the value of being able to reproduce them is dubious. At $35 it is far cheaper to buy an assembled Pi and not have to worry about the time involved in acquiring parts, assembly, and verification. Even for those that have the tools to build one it would be a phenomenal waste of time at that price point. If your production volume is high enough to beat $35 then you may as well do a custom design anyway that has exactly the hardware and interfaces you need.

    • by stenvar (2789879)

      "Open hardware" means that other people can quickly produce a fully compatible board. That's really useful for end users even if they are never going to make the board themselves.

    • I don't know if Intel would be any different; but my understanding is that the 'openness' complaints about the Pi have something to do with the fact that BCM usually won't even spit on you without an NDA and an order for a zillion trays of parts, so it's nigh-impossible to recreate the system without either a massive minimum order quantity or a special relationship with them.

      As you say, production costs, for things like multilayer boards, tend to make having the PCB layout files less practically relevant
  • by doctor woot (2779597) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:47AM (#44904261)

    The most likely use cases today aren't hobbyist applications but industrial uses, Anders said. "The BeagleBone is a very small, low-power device, and it's targeted for some very specific applications for hobbying. You know, developing small proof-of-concept designs," Anders said. "Our initial offer for the MinnowBoard is actually more targeted toward industrial automation, industrial controls. What you'll find is a lot of manufacturers, companies creating products, if they want to create an x86 design, they have to buy a third-party reference platform which is closed. They have to buy large software support packages, support contracts, and they generally don't get the right to use the existing design as it is. They have to buy additional licenses and things to create the product."

    In other words, this is aimed at a completely different market than the ones looking for a raspberry pi or a beaglebone. From Rpi's own FAQ: "We want to see it being used by kids all over the world to learn programming." David Anders says it may reach price point similar to the Rpi or Beaglebone in the near future, but there's no promises. I know this sounds like nitpicking, but framing the discussion improperly with a misleading title is something Slashdot desperately needs to stop.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      If they really intended for it to be used by industry for automation and industrial controls, then why does it have *fewer* GPIO pins? You would get more out of just about any other board if that's your goal.

  • The open hardware is nice, but Intel totally blew it on the reasons why the RPi is popular: it's "powerful enough" while being very small and very cheap. Minnowboard's extra power isn't by enough to justify that kind of a price jump, and the rest falls squarely under YAGNI, therefore making no difference.

    This is something of a pity. I'd like to see an RPi with more expandability, but I was thinking more along the lines of a single Thunderbolt port. You could do that without increasing the price or size by a

    • RPi is cheap, and has all the I/O you'll ever want (for moderate values of "all"). Do not forget about the I/O, because it looks like that most board manufacturers do forget.

  • by bagofbeans (567926) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:54AM (#44904367)

    TFA mentioned next gen will use Bay Trail core (Atom Z3770), which is available with AES-NI. Now that is suddenly very useful for servers, because the encryption is fast (but still passes through the processor).

  • by xtal (49134) on Friday September 20, 2013 @11:56AM (#44904389)

    Look, I am an EE, this is not the same thing as the Pi.

    It's an order of magnitude more expensive, it's complicated, it has a part count from hell, it's bigger, in fact, it's different in just about every way imaginable.

    Catchpa is "pretend". Giggle.

    Try harder, Intel. ARM is coming for you..

  • by Anonymous Coward

    $200? They miss the point.

  • Are there binary blobs? If not, I'll buy one. If so, are the hardware specifications detailed enough for people to replace the binary blobs with open source drivers? If so, I'll buy one when that happens.

  • The Raspberry Pi's main mission is education. I have no idea where they're at with that, but the commercial aspect of selling boards to the masses is a very slick way to raise funds. Would you give them money just because you like their cause? Not so readily. Intel isn't competing in this market and most likely won't do so any time soon.

    If this board had an Nvidia card that did VDPAU, instead of that GMA cruft, I may have been interested - because I need VDPAU, and it works awesomely well with an Atom CPU a

  • Well (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by bhcompy (1877290)
    At least it doesn't have a ridiculous name like Raspberry Pi
    • O look, someone who knows nothing about computer naming history.
    • At least it doesn't have a ridiculous name like Raspberry Pi

      Yeah, what sort of fool would name a computer after fruit, I mean if we continue like this we'll get computers called Apple, Acorn, Apricot...

    • by Valdrax (32670)

      You must not be familiar with the fact that the Minnowboard is named after a tiny fish, and that the expansion boards are called "Lures." It's equally twee, but I don't have a problem with that.

  • by ffflala (793437) on Friday September 20, 2013 @12:15PM (#44904611)
    $200 is simply too far out of range of the $35/$50 Pi for it to be considered a competitor.

    Datedness and relative power of components aside, the open hardware platform aspect is a good selling point. Hopefully this lends an economy of scale to the product that ultimately gets it into the same ballpark.
  • by mewsenews (251487) on Friday September 20, 2013 @12:17PM (#44904639) Homepage
    How is a $200 board a raspberry pi competitor?
  • Actually, this isn't even a new product category for Intel. They already have the NUC (Next Unit of Computing), remember? The DCCP847DYE [computeruniverse.net] barebone box sells for €160. Sure, you have to add RAM and mass media storage, but it's still a nicer deal. Especially when it comes with a dual-core Celeron and an Intel HD Graphics GPU.
  • by nightsweat (604367) on Friday September 20, 2013 @01:03PM (#44905229)
    This vs. BeagleBoard Black - why would I go with this? The Black is $10 more than a Pi and $144 less than a Minnowboard.
    I can see putting a BBB vs. a RPi, but this is silly.
  • That's what it looks like to me. Maybe a bit smaller but not much. Also having a price that high defeats the whole object. It might be good but it isn't a competitor to the Raspberry Pi. Wrong size, wrong price backet.
  • This is an open platform, any one can build it, using parts available in one-off quantities?
    Where can I buy a single Atom CPU or Northbridge? The two most important, most expensive parts.

  • by pjrc (134994) <paul@pjrc.com> on Friday September 20, 2013 @02:29PM (#44906417) Homepage Journal

    Having created and published projects using both Raspberry Pi and Beaglebone Black, and speaking as someone who regularly publishes electronic projects and open source code (largely on the Arduino software), I'd echo what others have said... this thing really misses the mark, considering the high price and lack of I/O.

    Beaglebone Black is really the one Linux-based board that's doing everything right (except for the head start Raspberry Pi enjoys). The price is under $50, size is small, there's a LOT of I/O with advanced capabilities, performance is ok, and the feature I love the most on BBB: it has a decent performing 2 GB flash disk soldered to the board.

    As someone who publishes code for projects, a built-in flash disk with dependable performance a huge benefit. With a Raspberry Pi, you have no idea how their system will perform if disk I/O matters. They might use a SanDisk Ultra card (or whatever SanDisk is calling them now), which can do about 1 to 2 Mbyte/sec with random seeks, still slow by PC standards, but fast enough to be useful. But odds are they'll use a cheap SD card, where the random I/O performance can be as slow as 20 kbytes/sec.

    If Intel really wants to rule this Linux-based project world, they'll need come out with something in the $40 to $60 price range, maybe with high-end options approaching $99. A good performing built-in SSD, enough RAM, lots of I/O, and good connectivity (USB, Ethernet, Wifi) are the killer features people need for real projects. A faster x86 processor on an overpriced, feature-poor board without SSD is never going to compete with great products like the Beaglebone Black.

  • by gnalre (323830) on Friday September 20, 2013 @02:37PM (#44906479)

    Intel should really be putting something back into the community. While they are mucking around the engineers of the future are learning to use their greatest competitor's hardware.

    What they should of done is make a $50 board, give away a cut down version of vxworks(which they own). However they are so scared of undercutting the bottom line they will not do this.

    Seriously they deserve everything that is going to happen to them

    • by unixisc (2429386)

      Why do they need to give away VxWorks? They could make a board w/ something like a celeron, fire it up w/ Minix, which is FOSS BSD license, and then it's good to go.

      Or if they have any of the old Pentium or 486 designs, they could put one of those on such a thing, and keep working @ it till they get the price down to $50. Fire it up w/ something like 256MB of RAM, and maybe give it a microSD slot for the bulk storage. In fact, if Intel wants to get into this, they could make a single chip that has ever

The only problem with being a man of leisure is that you can never stop and take a rest.

Working...