Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Hardware

New BTX Form Factor Announced At IDF 269

Posted by timothy from the why-does-factor-follow-form dept.
xyote writes "A new motherboard form factor was announced at IDF today. See Google News for various press stories on it (how's that for up to date links?). Also, go here for the actual BTX specs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New BTX Form Factor Announced At IDF More

New BTX Form Factor Announced At IDF

Comments Filter:

  • Link to specs (Score:5, Informative)

    by dalleboy ( 539331 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:03AM (#6986284) Homepage
    The specs pdf [formfactors.org] for those whose browser doesn't handle backslashes.

  • Whats next? (Score:5, Funny)

    by pagercam2 ( 533686 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:04AM (#6986291)
    Well lets see, ATX is getting replaced by BTX, so if I remeber correctly from Kindergarten the next new technology will be CTX, DTX and ETX. I just love it when a plan comes together! (A-Team circa 1984).

  • Huh? (Score:5, Funny)

    by elid ( 672471 ) <eli.ipod@g m a il.com> on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:05AM (#6986302)
    BTX will enable the industry to strike a better balance in thermal management, system size and shape, acoustics, and performance -- all critical attributes to innovate desktop PCs for the digital home. (from http://www.dvhardware.net/article.php?sid=1894)

    Gotta love the acoustics of my motherboard. In fact, I do all of my home recording inside while sitting inside my PC box.

    • Re:Huh? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zathrus ( 232140 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:28AM (#6986539) Homepage
      What, you think the motherboard plays no part in the acoustics/sound level from your PC?

      So, I suppose that a motherboard with a fan on the north bridge is just as quiet as one without a fan, right?

      Acoustics may not be the best word to use, but it's certainly valid. From Webster's:
      1 singular in construction : a science that deals with the production, control, transmission, reception, and effects of sound

      • Re:Huh? (Score:3, Informative)

        by elvum ( 9344 ) *
        More to the point, that quote was talking about system noise, not motherboard noise (as I read it).

    • Translation: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DrCode ( 95839 )
      "We're going after you gnerds who think you can upgrade by just plugging a new CPU or memory stick into your existing MB instead of buying a whole new computer. Muahahahahahahaha!"

  • New Form Factor, and Easy to break! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by -Grover ( 105474 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:06AM (#6986313)
    From here [dvhardware.net]
    A new technology available from Intel in mid-2004, will help to simplify home networking by including a wireless access point and router functionality as an embedded feature of the PC to help minimize the need for external equipment or cables to build a small home network.

    Maybe I'm just pessimistic, but does anyone want to take a stab at how long it takes for this to turn into a problem?

    • Re:New Form Factor, and Easy to break! (Score:5, Funny)

      by MouseR ( 3264 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:12AM (#6986378) Homepage
      Maybe I'm just pessimistic, but does anyone want to take a stab at how long it takes for this to turn into a problem?

      Well, Longhorn is currently scheduled for 2006, so my guess is ~3 years.
    • well, every (better) mac has 8.11 and there isnt a "problem".

      And i dont think this will be a greater problem than computers connected to the internet. If someone cracks your PC, does it really matter if the data is running through copper or air?
      • My issue is just with this portion
        "to build a small home network"

        I don't know how much work you do for friends/family, but I can forsee this causing alot of problems. People setting up a wireless home network without closing it off properly (which let's face it, is not in Joe User's 1 page install instructions) can be a pretty big problem.

        Broadcasting wireless home network + shared drives - Mac Address Filtering = Bad.

        I know I don't want to clean up that mess, or tell someone "Sorry bub, you
      • Can every (better) mac also act as an Access Point and Router for that 802.11 card or is it just usable to connect TO Access Points?

        I don't think just putting an 802.11 card into a PC (mac or intel), can make it act as an AP, which is what Intel is talking about doing. Having a PC be able to act as an AP and Router isn't neccesarily a bad thing, but considering that most of those PCs will be running Windows, I would bet most of them will also not be properly secured. This could be very serious, not so mu

  • What happened to WTX? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mr.henry ( 618818 ) * on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:07AM (#6986327) Journal
    I remember seeing a WTX case from Addtronics [addtronics.com]. I thought that was the next standard.
    • Just waaaay ahead of its time.

      First we have to get through CTX, then DTX, then ETX, then... well, let's just say that WTX is a few decades away.

      • > First we have to get through CTX...

        You're a bit behind, aren't you? I got my first CTX [ctxintl.com] *years* ago. I particularly appreciate the big screen on the side that lets me see what's going on inside my computer.

    • I think WTX was more aimed at the higher end workstation and server market rather than the desktop market. Part of it was that WTX was designed to handle specific heat zones (which I'm guessing is being adopted into BTX as well as the server-specific SSI form factors) and has the ability to hold large power supplies.

      So far, the biggest users of the WTX form factor seems to have been the original Itanium workstations that were sold by SGI, HP, Dell, IBM, etc. The form factor worked quite well for the Itaniu
    • Just look at the size of that case [addtronics.com] compared to the leaf in the backgroud -- I'll bet you could get a few servers in the space of a 5 1/4" drive bay.

  • P4 "Extreme Edition" much more interesting (Score:5, Informative)

    by msgmonkey ( 599753 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:07AM (#6986329)
    The announcement of a 3.2GHz P4 with 2MB of cache targeted at gamers as reported by The Enquirer [theinquirer.net] is more of an eye opener to me. The price tag will probable live up to the "Extreme" label tho, seems like they are affraid that the Athlon 64 will take away some of their "bleeding edge gotta have it" revenue.
    • Oops, make that "The Inquirer" :)

  • Here we go again.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by grims ( 602269 )
    So will other mobo makers follow intel footsteps and make up to this formfactor, or will they fork off to make their own FormFactors ? Does anyone see any of this happening and by whom ?

  • On off button (Score:5, Interesting)

    by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxruby@ c o m c a s t . net> on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:10AM (#6986361)
    Interesting note here about the on/off button.
    Intel also previewed an instant on/off technology, allowing consumers to press the "on" button and the PC is ready in a few seconds.

    Didn't we have instant "off" capabilities back in the day of the 8086? Does anyone else miss the ability to push the power button and have their computer turn off now? With most modern BIOS's ignoring user settings for instant off, it really has to make me wonder about some of these new fangled "innovations".

    The thing that makes me wonder though is this part
    If the PC loses power, this technology quickly recovers without losing data or rebooting the PC under normal operation.

    Just how are they going to avoid rebooting a computer if the power goes off? MRAM is set to debut, and this could in theory hold the users' data state, but you still have to boot the computer up through the normal BIOS process, or am I missing something?

    • On/Off dead, welcome to standby (Score:4, Insightful)

      by msgmonkey ( 599753 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:14AM (#6986410)
      Much like a TV. That's what Intel/MS wants to do, make the PC into a "proper" consumer device.
      • Much like a TV. That's what Intel/MS wants to do, make the PC into a "proper" consumer device.

        FWIW Macs have more or less done this ever since OS X came out. I just nudge the power button on my Apple TFT, and the Mac instantly goes into sleep mode; nudge it again and it wakes up in about a second.

        Cheers,

        Ethelred

        • Congradulations, you now have what any ATX PC with Windows (or a properly set up Linux) has had since 1998.

          • Yeah, but windows standby sucks, at least on 9x - probably more than half the time I've had to reboot 9x boxes on standby. And you have to do Start -> Shut Down -> Standby, instead of just tapping a button as you get up to leave. X does it right; fast, stable, and easy. BTW, Classic has supported Sleep since the first PPCs came out. Works OK, at least better than Win..
            • Yeah, but windows standby sucks, at least on 9x - probably more than half the time I've had to reboot 9x boxes on standby.

              Comparing a 2(?)-year-old OS to a 7+-year-old OS isn't fair. Suspend and hibernate both work fairly well on Win2K and WinXP. (I normally use hibernation...it allows the machine to power off completely, but stores the current state to the HD. It takes a bit longer than suspend as a result, but a power outage won't faze it.)

          • So, you're saying your computer will come out of sleep mode in 2 seconds like a modern-day Mac?

            Tell me which one, because I haven't seen it. All our PC laptops take 15-30 seconds to go into and come out of sleep mode, and these are Dells, Toshibas, and Sonys from the past year. That's TRUE sleep mode, not just turning off the display.

            Both my 17" iMac and my 12" PowerBook G4 go into and come out of sleep in LITERALLY 2 seconds. And, I mean after 2 seconds, everything is working and ready to go, not just
      • I don't think that is a Very Bad Thing in and of itself. Just that M$ is doing it. See, Linux can't pull off that sort of thing due to less market clout. This gives M$ a distinct advantage in that they have deep channels of communication with the hw manufacturers.
        All that aside, instant on/off/standby would be very nice. Already, we can "hibernate", which is a much used feature of my laptop, and with MRAM, this should be even easier. Although, bootup times are becoming more accepted. Recently, I saw a CD p
      • Much like a TV. That's what Intel/MS wants to do, make the PC into a "proper" consumer device.

        The irony of that statement is rich. Just like an RCA TV perhaps? RCA used to dominate TV sales, distribution and service. What else whould you expect from the evil radio corporation that crushed the inventor of TV? In any case, they made crappy TVs that needed much service. Everyone in the supply train but the customer was happy until others started making reliable TVs. RCA lost out and has yet to recover.

      • Much like a TV. That's what Intel/MS wants to do, make the PC into a "proper" consumer device.

        Barring any os and hardware pro/con rhetoric, we have a long way to go to turn the PC into a "proper" consumer device. Look at the level of maintenance for all your household consumer devices. These devices are, by nature, special use. From what I see, consumers tend ignore as best they can, complexities in consumer goods, A good example being the rich features in new digital camcorders.

        If our current roundup o
    • Battery backup?

      Laptops do it, of course, and the original Macintosh did, too -- it used its clock battery to save the RAM.
    • They prolly ensure the swap file is always up to date, so they can just load the RAM image and roll.

      I believe Emacs does a similar trick with all its macros.

    • Re:On off button (Score:3, Insightful)

      by DarkBlackFox ( 643814 )
      As far as I know, upon bootup, the contents of the BIOS are decompressed to RAM to begin operation of the components. Naturally, upon power off, the contents of the RAM are cleared. If MRAM were implemented, even if only for BIOS functions, the entire decompression/hardware detection (IDE devices, kb/mouse, etc) would become null, considering how many hardware changes occur in the average computer between power cycles.
      • Many motherboards now have a case detection switch option. If you implemented this then you could determine if any internal hardware had changed. If you got really froggy you could use sonar to determine the distance to the case lid, that would be fun :) And of course, run hardware autodetection any time the power has been cycled.

    • Re:On off button (Score:5, Insightful)

      by msgmonkey ( 599753 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:23AM (#6986480)
      In answer to your question about avoiding rebooting even when the power is down, most likely to be "suspend to disk". Memory contents are copied to a part of the hard disk when you turn "off" and restored if the machine loses power.

      The problem with suspend to disk is that you have to store the "state" of any adapters so that they can be restored too when power is restored. Your add-on adapters need to support this feature otherwise it just wont work, the spec has been out for a while but I'm not sure how well it has been implemented up to now.

      • Re:On off button (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @12:51PM (#6987267) Homepage
        wrong.

        all you need to do is write device drivers that are smart enough to handle this... sense they came up from a "magical poof" start (what I call it.. the phb's like silly names here) and then simply reinitialize the devices.. ethernet can get it's dhcp lease again (if it's dhcp) and so on.

        it does NOT require hardware redesign.
        • I agree it does not *require* a hardware design, but it is a hardware design because Intel is in the hardware business. The Suspend to Disk functionality is part of ACPI.
    • Didn't we have instant "off" capabilities back in the day of the 8086? Does anyone else miss the ability to push the power button and have their computer turn off now? With most modern BIOS's ignoring user settings for instant off, it really has to make me wonder about some of these new fangled "innovations".

      I have a Tandy TRS-80 model III and it is kind of weird to just push the button and have it go off.

      But you know what? I don't miss it. Why? I don't need it anymore. I don't turn off my computer

    • Does anyone else miss the ability to push the power button and have their computer turn off now?

      Although back in the days of 8086s I scolded people heartily for exactly what I now do to address the very problem you mention...

      Just plug your PC into a power strip, and use the power strip's switch as your on/off button. Instant off - No delays, resets instead of powering down, "are you sure"s, needing to hold the button for X seconds, or outright ignoring that you pressed the button. It goes off, it stay
    • The PC will have a battery built into it that will power the computer long enough to force the PC into hibernation. When the power is restored, you won't be "rebooting" the PC, it will just reload state.

      I'm guessing you are thinking of the word reboot in the technical sense, as yes, you are going to be going through a POST sequence and such.

      I wouldn't be surprised, if as part of this technology, the POST sequence can be skipped in this particular scenario, since the technology is in the chipset/motherboar
    • Most of the BIOSes I've seen that ignore power button presses respect them if you hold the button down for more than 4 seconds. This catches a lot of people.
      • In fact I've never seen an ATX mobo that disabled the 5 second powerdown. No matter how badly a machine is wedged, 5 seconds is all you need to bring it down. I really don't see why everybody makes such a huge deal out of this, unless they have to run down the aisles in a lab or something shutting each machine off by hand for some reason. (Hint: this should not be the case as it would not flush the buffers on any modern filesystem or in the disk cache before shutdown, it's bad practice for normal use. I
    • MRAM is set to debut, and this could in theory hold the users' data state, but you still have to boot the computer up through the normal BIOS process,

      You could have a flag or register or some such that indicates whether to do the fast power up or the full BIOS scan. Wire it to the 'case opened' switch to ensure a BIOS scan if the box was opened.

      I've yet to see anyone duplicate (on PC-class hardware) a feature that one of the 68K-based UNIX boxen of the mid 1980s had (I think it was an NCR box, but we we

  • Mirror (Score:5, Funny)

    by Arc04 ( 601196 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:14AM (#6986398)
    That pdf is so slow Here is a mirror [greatscopes.com].

  • Its about time. (Score:5, Informative)

    by imsabbel ( 611519 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:16AM (#6986424)
    Could read the article because it is slashdotted, but a replacement for atx is really needed.

    At the time of introduction, atx was designed for CPUs with a power dissipation of 10-20W. The cpu socket was placed right under the power suply to cool the heatsink with the airflow of the PS fan.

    Nowaday, 80W CPUs dont benefit from this closeness to another heatsource in the PC. ATX doesnt include anything that allows thermal coupling between board and case (think of audio amp heathsink) or air-tunnels to cool the cpu with air from outside the case.

    Also, eATX boards are quite huge, to big for anything but server cases, but normal atx isnt quite big enough for dual cpu boards with dual channel RAM (or opteron with 4 channel ram).

  • New shape means a new case. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by d60b9y ( 692396 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:18AM (#6986444) Journal
    Can't read the specs, they seem to be slashdotted, how did that happen... Of course, the main thing that happens when a new form factor comes out is that everybody who wants to upgrade their motherboard needs to upgrade their case as well which means a nice fat pay-cheque for the the beige box builders... That, more than any technical reason, will probably drive the uptake of BTX.
    • AFAIK motherboard manufacturers have a vanishingly small fraction of the case market. Are you suggesting a conspiracy where case manufacturers pay motherboard manufacturers to shift to BTX? If not, what are you suggestig?
      • I think what he is suggesting is that Case Manufacturers should be enthusiastic about this since it increases the chances of a person needing a new Case, so they should be pushing along with MotherBoard Manufacturers to make this happen.

  • BTX (Score:4, Interesting)

    by absolut_kurant ( 152888 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:19AM (#6986454)
    Well, in the 80's in Germany and Austria (maybe in other countries, too?) a system called BTX (Bildschirmtext, On-Screen Text) was introduced. You could call it an Interner-precursor, comparable to the French stuff (Minitel?).

    Anyway, here are the pics: BTX [mein-dortmund.de]

    Maybe we'll get the cool cases back ;)
  • I can't access the "google" news stories as the site has been slashdotted.

    Anyone have a mirror?

  • PDF Mirrors (Score:3, Informative)

    by nstrom ( 152310 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:33AM (#6986573)
    http://reptilian.net/BTX_Spec_1_0.pdf [reptilian.net]
    http://web.newsguy.com/nstrom/BTX_Spec_1_0.pdf [newsguy.com]

  • What we really need (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stratjakt ( 596332 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:34AM (#6986584) Journal
    is not another desktop form factor.

    This is just a neato way to make your old case and PSU obsolete come next upgrade. Hooray!

    At least BabyAT to ATX made some sense, in that it generally relocated the hotter CPUs next to PSU fans, etc...

    What we need is a common laptop form factor. I want to be able to buy an empty laptop chassis/lcd, my own mobo, drive, etc, etc an put one together... While possible, its a major hoof in the noots right now. I want to build a laptop with a trackball and full sized keyboard and not one of those useless touchpads or thumbsticks. I dont care if it's 8 inches wider than Dells junk.

    Etc etc

    • Re:What we really need (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      ecs desknote comes sorta close, you can replace the cpu and ram with regular commodity bits.
      http://www.ecs.com.tw/products/a929.htm

    • Re:What we really need (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I must add to that by saying that the first big problem in commodity laptops is a standard method of interfacing to LCD/keyboard/etc..

    • What we need is a common laptop form factor. [...] I want to build a laptop [...] I dont care if it's 8 inches wider than [Dell's] junk

      Let me get this straight: you want a laptop that's 8 inches wider than standard laptops.

      If we assume current laptops are around 12 inches wide, you're talking about a 20" laptop.

      And you think this monstrosity will become a "common" form factor?
    • For the super-custom stuff you're talking about. Sure, it would be perfectly possible - but the parts would be so low-volume that the cost would be astronomical, probably far more than just buying an off-the-shelf laptop.
      Anyway, any standard laptop form factor nowadays would be rather thin and not overly wide, certainly nothing you could fit a trackball and full-size keyboard in without a hacksaw and some bondo.

    • Re:What we really need (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Zathrus ( 232140 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @12:50PM (#6987264) Homepage
      This is just a neato way to make your old case and PSU obsolete come next upgrade. Hooray!

      Glad you RTFA.

      The PS is identical - same connectors (as long as you have the newer PS w/ the 4-pin 12V connector), same lines, etc.

      Doesn't look like the case needs to change either, although I haven't looked into the nitty gritty details of the mounting holes (appear to be the same at first glance) or volumetric zones (which look interesting; my first glance doesn't show any problems with cases that follow the true ATX spec and don't try to provide side vent holes for the CPU).

      At least BabyAT to ATX made some sense, in that it generally relocated the hotter CPUs next to PSU fans, etc...

      The ATX form factor made no sense at all when it was first released. Which is why it was revised quickly to make up for the utterly braindead ideas in it. The original spec called for the power supply to pull air inward and vent onto the CPU. So you had a huge heat source (the PS) sucking in cool air and then blowing the now warmed air onto an even warmer part of the case that desperately needs cooling (the CPU). The ATX 1.03 spec quickly remedied that and reversed the airflow of the PS back outwards.

      Now you "merely" have one huge heat source (the CPU) located right between two other huge heat sources (PS and video). Yeah, that makes "sense".

      Not to mention issues with putting this into a small form factor case where there is inadequate specs on maximum heights for components.

      I won't even touch the laptop suggestion... other posters have done it justice already.

  • What problem? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by wumpus2112 ( 649012 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:36AM (#6986606)
    100W PCs "no problem" [theregister.co.uk], ever increasing GPU heat "no problem" (gotta love those power connectors), ever increasing hard drive heat "no problem".

    Steadily decreasing box size, I smell a problem.

    Wumpus

  • PC's should be getting bigger (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @11:57AM (#6986817)
    PC's should get bigger, not smaller. We have plenty of space on our desktops, so I don't see why I should have to sacrifice speed for space.

    What Intel should do is crank up CPU speeds to unreal heights - like 10 Ghz and put a monster cooling system on it. I don't mind if I have to plug the heat sink system into a separate outlet.

    What Seagate should do is increase HD size to 100 terabytes and put a huge heat sink on that too. If I have to plug the hard drive and heat sink into separate outlets, that should be fine. I have plenty of free outlets on my power strip.

    What NVidia should do is make a triple-slot GeForce FX2. Make it 10 times faster, with a huge huge heat sink fan that I can plug into another outlet.

    With all this, I think the new PC form factor should be a cube, about 3 feet on all sides.

  • Call me silly (Score:4, Interesting)

    by zakezuke ( 229119 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @12:14PM (#6986960)
    Call me silly, but I rather liked the VME and/or multi-bus for computers. [http://www.vita.com/vmefaq/index.html]

    For those not familar, basicly you had a series of cards that you shoved directly into the case it self, without need of popping the top. Two thumbscrews for each card and it just slids on out. [http://www.vita.com/vmefaq/resources/Image2.gif]

    There was no *motherboard* per say but rather a "cpu board" but basicly it was the same thing. While VME boards were "huge", I can imagine much in the way of scalability for a trimmed up variation of the theme. Small desktop systems can enjoy the benifits of having a smaller backplane with only 3 or 4 slots, more robust users could enjoy larger cases with just more slots but essentaly the same motherboard.

    Silly idea, probally. It would produce less in the way of waste in every motherboard wouldn't need yet another slew of slots on it. Cards would be mounted at two points rather then one point without fear of one end poping up when you put the screw in like was an issue with AGP video cards.

    • I'd like to see a smart backplane that allowed me to plug multiple CPUs, display cards, NICs, disk controllers, etc but arbitrarily combine them without changing cabling or dissassembling.

      We used to have this weird "communications server" that had a bunch of slots where you could mount smallish motherboards; it had one keyboard/mouse/monitor, and you could switch the display among all of them. This was 8 years ago and they were all 386s (I think we had one 486-20 card), but that was just a precursor to to

    • Re:Call me silly (Score:3, Informative)

      by Wesley Felter ( 138342 )
      This stuff is still alive but now it's called CompactPCI.

  • Dryer Vent, Anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nuxx ( 10153 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @12:16PM (#6986982) Homepage
    Seeing as the BTX spec calls for a specific channel to the front of the case to allow air for cooling the CPU, I can already see the air conditioner + dryer vent hose into front of case mods. Also, the part of the spec which calls for a method to mount a device through the motherboard to the chassis, sort of like the original P4 heatsinks, is wonderful. It should be so much easier to design high performance, low noise coolers now.

  • Why? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by freidog ( 706941 )
    ok, i understand the rational for moving the CPU, in fact i applaud it, get my 60W space heater out from behind large large chunk of hot metal we call the PSU. I know many cases now turn the PSU 90 degrees from the ATX spec and mount it above the CPU, but requring good air flow around the CPU is nice addition. but some things here make very little sense to me. Like the +12V connector, they've already moved to a 24 pin BTX connector, so it's not like like they need legacy support for ATX boards, so why not

  • look at the dimensions- english, not metric... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by millia ( 35740 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @01:35PM (#6987723) Homepage
    curious. after looking at the pdf from one of the mirrors, i wondered why the oddball metric measurements- and the answer is they're conversions from english. it's an even 10.5" deep, +/- .01".
    all the other dimensions are based around english measurements, too, and have variances of 1/100 of an inch or .25 millimeter.

    i presume this is for case compatibility, and existing case have slots that work out that way, too, so to avoid having to make a new case that replaces ATX, this is the compromise.

    i wonder though- does this hurt manufacturing in the long run? is it harder for foreign factories to make something that fits *precisely* because of this? having spent much time over the years fighting to make things fit, especially cards, is it time to go to a more exact metric squaring?

    or when manufacturing, does it really matter? is 266.7 mm just as easy to attain as 270?

    some of you mechanical engineers, feel free to add.

  • One hard disk slot! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by oolon ( 43347 ) on Wednesday September 17, 2003 @03:04PM (#6988576)
    Man they must be joking the standard tower form, has space for 2 Optical Drives (I assume they mean 5 1/4), one Floppy and one hard disk! There isn't even a required gap, in front of the hard disk for a fan!
    It may be great for the processor but it justs sucks for all the other hardware.

    James

Slashdot Top Deals

"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer

Close