Open Source Finally Hits Real Silicon 247
pagercam2 writes "While Open Source software has many success stories, hardware and particularly chips haven't had as much. While there have been multiple Open Source projects, none have come to a final product until now. The OpenRISC 1000 has been implemented by Flextronics Semiconductor(a division of Flextronics, the contract manufacturer possibly best known for its production of many Cisco products) along with PCI, 10/100 Ethernet, serial, GPIO etc. ... Details and pretty pictures available at OpenCores.org, and it even runs uClinux. Good Job!"
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally a competitor for the 286 (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of what's floating in space runs with what we could consider antiquated hardware.
Old != Junk
Re:So what's Sparc V? (Score:4, Insightful)
So what's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just my two cents...
Re:What can't be open-sourced? (Score:5, Insightful)
You'll never be able to produce an automobile en mass scale cheaper than VW (or nearly as good).
In general, what problems would there be in creating open-source engineering designs for hardware of all kinds branched off from off-patent intellectual property?
Again you would never be able to mass produce the item cheaper than a proprietary company. Besides there is very little demand for box cameras and tube radios.
A somewhat different approach (Score:4, Insightful)
Part of what makes Open Source hardware important is that Open Source designs are what will actually be implemented as small scale manufacturing [ennex.com] becomes more practical. There are various proposals around for doing manufacturing of chips using rather different processes than we are used to today(i.e. "growing" chips in a chemical medium). What these ultimately take us towards is robotic infrastructure that can be remotely controlled and is as "self-replicating" as a lathe or a blacksmith's shop.
Re:Whats the point........ (Score:2, Insightful)
...because I, and many others, would rather run linux on a 160Mhz processor than MS Windows on a 5.03G processor.
Sera
Re:where ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Where do they expect this to go? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll take an open-source, standards-compliant 486 computer over a 2Ghz Trusted Computing appliance any day.
--K.
Re:Open Source Chipsets (Score:5, Insightful)
Because advanced CAD tools to design state of the art microprocessors costs millions of dollars. Even if you afford these tools, state-of-the-art fabs cost billions of dollars. Open Source works in software because equipment to develop software is cheap enough that anyone can afford it. Equipment to develop hardware costs a fortune, and needs some corporate support, or a lot of donations. Until a process makes it to MOSIS, the average person can't afford access to it.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:cool, but I want more specs (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Where do they expect this to go? (Score:3, Insightful)
DRM, comming soon to a computer near you! Whether you want it or not! Restrictions that the whole family can enjoy together.
Re:whats the point? - It moves is the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
But it won't stop there. Turning this new capability to its advantage, it will make sense to re-compile the CPU cores to perform the task at hand with maximum efficiency. If you're going to start doing that, an open design is nigh on essential.
We are rapidly entering an era where it is worth designing things that cannot yet be built, because the manufacturing technology is catching up very rapidly. Even now, Sony are designing their consumer device chipsets as FPGAs to shorten time to market. The trend will not decrease.
Vik
Re:whats the point? (Score:3, Insightful)
Assuming you can come up with the cad tools to implement your schematic and layout changes, you can use MOSIS [mosis.org] to fab the chip. It costs money, but getting hardware for free as in beer is unrealistic.
Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Finally a competitor for the 286 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sheesh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Real World vs. Abstract World (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So what's the point? (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, thats my full time job. There are plenty of electronics techs out thier who are slowly or not so slowly losing their jobs. Most electronics are becoming less hardware and more software(thank you software guys you suck):P. So many of us could contribute in some way while we are sitting in the unemployment lines with the rest of IT the way alot of you guys conribute to your favorite open source projects.
really now... (Score:4, Insightful)
while i'm sure the opencores crowd has done an outstanding job, you need to look further at the Big Picture.... and comparable processors.
a motorola ppc8245 at 300MHz is $19 in qty (at least that's what we pay). it has all of the features enumerated in the article above (16K caches, PCI, MMU, ethernet, dual UARTs, etc etc etc), and is supplied replete with a Big DataBook of We're Pretty Damn Sure This Will Work Knowledge and 10e6 embedded programmers worldwide. not to mention an entire library of (linux AND powerpc) Google entries. you can attach all manner of BDM/BDI/JTAG debuggers (e.g. BDI2000) to an 82xx and there are a half dozen compiler suites (including gcc) to choose from. boundary scan routines are already understood and implemented, which eases ICT development at production time. if it's 2AM the day before the Big Pitch to the client, i'm pretty sure i can find someone who's awake and can fix my 82xx register access problem. i'm no motorola bigot (i always try to make a PIC fit until it can't do the job) but the economies of scale are WAY WAY WAY against the little guy when it comes to microprocessors.
you are not selling your soul to moto for $19. you are making a cost effective, performance increasing, risk reducing decision, that's all.
just another datapoint.