ARM-based netbooks primed to invade Computex?
By Darren Murph 
posted March 13th 2009 10:18AM
posted March 13th 2009 10:18AM
posted March 13th 2009 10:18AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Who said it?
"Netbooks will be a race to the bottom"
Someone at Sony did. Oh so ironic in light of the Vaio P, but there you go. (I am almost embarrassed at remembering this.)
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/27/sony-exec-sees-eee-like-pcs-as-having-potentially-negative-impac/
I personally don't think ARM-based netbooks are a bad thing - they better embrace the low-cost, low-power ideals that UMPCs were supposed to strive for.
Let us see if Apple can turn the direction 180 and make it a race to cram as much stuff into a netbook!
-Finger reader
-Sim slot
-iPhone dock
-Firewire
-Thing-a-ma-bob
-3Ghz processor
-8 hour battery life
-2800 x 2100 resolution OLED Touch 10" screen
-External Apple logo screen (been done)
-touch sensitive unibody chassis
-3.2 MP camera CArl Zeis Lens with Motion traction/Gesture input
Because Apple has a good track record of that? *cough*Macbook Air*cough*
I actually think a 10" Apple netbook/tablet is much more likely to have an ARM CPU than an x86 CPU.
WOW that looks powerful.......as a phone.
Not an iPhone...
A nokia most likely!
(low rank city here i come!)
That appears to be an ARM-based interface of some sort... probably a printer controller card. You have USB (notice this is the input side of USB, not the flat, output side), likely a 9-pin RS232 serial connection (notice this is not a VGA output), and a output connector on the bottom, right side of this PCB.
In short, this is not a netbook mobo.
LOL! I just looked it up. This board has a FREESCALE processor on it, not ARM!
Not a print controller card or anything else.. that's just some random development board for testing.
And don't expect to see a giant ARM logo on the chip. fyi, ARM doesn't make cpus, they license the cores to other manufacturers who integrate them and eventually slap their own logos (like Freescale here) on them.
Most people only use their PC to browse the web, send email and write letters and ARM processors have reached the point where they can do all of these things very competently while using only a fraction of the power an Intel processor uses. I'll definately be getting one since it's sure to have a fantastic battery life and will be great for browsing the web on the train.
I also hope sell a stand alone motherbaord because it would be ideal for use in a home server where processing power is unimportant and you're more concerned about lowing your electricity bill. Such a board could have a lot of other uses like car PCs and cheap computers for develping countries and I'm surprised it has taken so long to finally start selling ARM PCs.
@aaron
ARM is the CPU core architecture, freescale is just the company integrating the ARM core with other components...
Anyways, although the Cortex-A8 is a great processor for smartphones, I don't think ARM will be competitive in netbooks until the multi-core Cortex-A9 comes out in a year.
@Charles
http://beagleboard.org/
Techs around the world groaned as Arm powered Netbook's were announced. I can hear the calls now my computer is slow. What kind of computer do you have? It is one of them Net-whachijiggers from (insert Arm based manufacturer). Sir or madam you are a cheap @$$ go buy a real computer then call me. Click...Dial Tone...
actually since they wont be running windows ... they wont get viruses and also won't be running slowly
there are actually a few Operating systems these devices can potentially run ie Linux BSD and possibly sometime down the road Haiku or Aros .... all of which are WAY faster than any version of windows once it get an inevitable (confliker anyone? ... try not getting that one) virus or two
What is the potentiometer for?
That's a speed pot...it makes the netbook go faster...
Potentially huge battery life and Ubuntu. N810 in a usable formfactor, lovely!
Speaking of N810s, I'd gladly kill a man (any man) for a rotatable Maemo-powered touchscreen netbook.
Just wanted to put that out there.
/Women and children cost extra
//$200 w/GPS & Thinkpad style biometric disk-encryption for flash, that's how much
///$300?
You can start with Paul A. Chapel ,iEye and some of the other idiots around here.
If it's running on ARM, it isn't a netbook. Netbooks are low-priced, small laptop computers. If it can't run the world's most ubiquitous desktop OS (Windows XP) then it doesn't qualify.
That's not to say that a machine running an ARM processor in a netbook form factor isn't a good idea, but it fulfills a TOTALLY different demand than the x86 machines do.
That said, I'd like to see something with an Eee 701 form-factor running a customized, feature complete version of Android for under $200.
If I remember well, the first netbook (eeepc) was running linux.
I still have the original eeepc netbook and it runs linux. The OS it runs has nothing to do with calling it a netbook, the name itself kind of gives you a clue what it's for.
@neil: For going "Eeeeeeeee!" ?
ubuntu is working on an ARM version that will be out by the time these products are released. so i don't see how that's any less functional. cpu architecture doesn't affect how you access the internet or edit documents.
If being able to run windows natively is a requirement for a computer to be a laptop, then I guess all the iBooks and Powerbooks sold before the Intel transition don't qualify as well :/
Nah! You're just talking nonsense :)
Could have incredibly low size and weight form factor or incredible battery life.
Think of the nokia N810 with a 3-cell or 6-cell battery. It would last for days.
I'm interested.
The link you give bring to a 266Mhz powered Arm.
N810 has a different CPU (400mhz) and the Arm cortex A8 that's discussed in the article is around 800Mhz and even better on batteries. I guess I could know by buying a beagleboard, but I still prefer to wait till someone builds it and review it for me.
Good, I look forward to the death of that x86 fossil, at least in the mobile realm. The current generation of ARM SoC products (MX515, OMAP3,etc) aren't much slower than the Atom in practice - I strongly suggest picking up a Beagle Board and playing with it. In a netbook environment used for web browsing and checking your email, you won't tell the difference between the two - except for the much smaller form factor and 2-4x the battery life. Also, these chips have integrated OpenGL hardware acceleration and a DSP allowing for real time 2D/3D rendering and decoding of 720p h.264 video - all in a single package (aka a chip) that uses a fraction of the power of the Atom processor, while also eliminating the need for a power hungry chipset like that required by bloated x86 systems.
The next generation of ARM SoCs coming out later this year include dual core offerings with over 1 GHz clocks (and remember, ARM is generally clock for clock faster than x86, at least as far as the Atom is concerned), along with faster GPUs and DSPs. These will blow away existing Atom based systems in performance, cost, and overall mobility. The only thing going for x86 vendors here is some users need it to run software stuck to the x86 platform.
Let's see...
Lower cost
Much longer battery life
Produces a whole lot less heat
Can be used to produce a much tighter, leaner form factor
Has several ready made operating systems
Lots of packages of popular software...
This beats the tar out of x86 netbooks.
"Has several ready made operating systems
Lots of packages of popular software..."
Uh.. you mean several variants of Linux?
And exactly which "popular" software packages are you talking about? What's your definition of 'popular'? Popular is Windows and Windows apps first, MacOS X and Mac apps a distant second and Linux is an even more distant third - even when compared to MacOS. Or do you mean "apps *I* like when you say 'popular'"?
Even if Microsoft ported the full Windows system to ARM (as opposed to WindowsCE/Windows Mobile, which is a heavily stripped down version), you'd still need to convince app developers to release an ARM version of their apps and we can't even get most developers to recompile for Win64.
The advantage of Netbooks is that they're lightweight, but otherwise fully functional laptops that run all the same software you run on your desktop, other than real resource hogs like high end video games. Change the processor to ARM and you've wiped out that advantage.
The iPhone is the ONLY ARM platform that's bucked this trend, and it's got a very special ecosystem that pretty much no other platform currently has and that no netbook does.
Longer battery life is always desirable, but there are other tradeoffs. The current netbooks with a 6 cell battery is quite acceptable for the vast majority of users, who tend to be 'on demand' users of netbooks, rather than 'always on'. What's needed now is 'internet anywhere' 3G or WiMAX connectivity like they're doing in Europe.
Sorry, but I'm willing to bet the return rate on ARM based netbooks will make the return rate of Linux x86 netbooks look wonderfully low.
@Jeff Lewis
"And exactly which "popular" software packages are you talking about? What's your definition of 'popular'? Popular is Windows and Windows apps first, MacOS X and Mac apps a distant second and Linux is an even more distant third - even when compared to MacOS. Or do you mean "apps *I* like when you say 'popular'"?"
I mean popular apps like Firefox, OpenOffice and GIMP. And if not the exact program, another that is just as good if not better. Just about every app from the Debian database is available, which is somewhere in the area of 20,000 applications.
Ultimately, outside of gaming, and ARM based Linux netbook can do *almost* everything a Windows based one can. And for *most* users, that is fine.
"The advantage of Netbooks is that they're lightweight, but otherwise fully functional laptops that run all the same software you run on your desktop, other than real resource hogs like high end video games. Change the processor to ARM and you've wiped out that advantage."
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. For me, a netbook is not a replacement notebook/desktop. It is an intermediary device that is nice and portable, that handles most basic PC functions like web browsing, email and basic productivity. I wouldn't do hardcore graphics or video editing on one.
And ultimately, having a Windows based system doesn't offer any real advantage if you take gaming out of the equation. If the same app for Windows is not available, then an equivalent Linux app is.
What I really need is a super-small board that's packing a USB root-hub connector, a serial port, and some jumper pins.
Hey! What'd'ya know! :)
Okay, so if a netbook in the first quarter of 2009 is only worth $249 with an x86 processor that can run Office at 1.6GHz, what the hell would you have to sell an ARM-based netbook for to make people want one? $99?
I think this is an interesting development, presumably returning the netbook to its roots--web-based everything. But unless they build new form factors (touch tablet maybe?) or hit very low price points, or have m-u-c-h better battery life... I'm not seeing it. Anybody who just builds something that looks like every other netbook out there will end up deader than the Via C7 (Chinese sales don't count).
Well, the ARM based processor already costs less than an Atom, so that savings can and should be passed off to the consumer.
Battery life is way better, twice the battery life should be easy to accomplish, with even greater gains possible with the right coding.
Your comment about form factor is spot on, but I'd say that it is also true for Atom based netbooks as well. With everyone and their mother putting out a netbook, style and wow are going to be very important, regardless of processor.
The weaknesses that the ARM units have are mostly negated by the very format of the netbook. They are slightly slower than an Atom unit (which can be offset to a degree by using a lean distro). They are useless for almost any sort of gaming (which isn't a netbook niche anyway). And while I could be wrong, I think that it takes some pretty good tweaking to get Flash running on it.
But, for somebody wanting to do basic things like web surfing, email, and some office productivity (which is likely the lion's share of the netbook market), an ARM unit is a great choice because of the low cost, low power consumption, and small amount of heat produced.
@jellimoo
"And while I could be wrong, I think that it takes some pretty good tweaking to get Flash running on it"
Ah ha, I wondered if this is why your comparison is so off. I'm going to assume you've never used an Atom 1.6GHz netbook.
The performance of an 1.6GHz Atom Single is *significantly* better than a 2.4GHz P4 Celeron. I know this because I just went through this transition. You can watch video with it with no troubles. Flash doesn't even slow it down. And no, no tweaking - right out of the box. In fact, my P4 Celeron couldn't handle Windows Media Center - yet my netbook COULD. That's real time MPEG2 decoding in software AND simultaneous recoding into MS-DVR format.
I do development using VS2008 on my Aspire One netbook. I even run Photoshop on it for quick touchups. The real limiting factor is the 1024x600 standard screen resolution, not the CPU speed. There are very few productivity apps that won't run quite well on a netbook. Really, only apps that require a heavy duty GPU are going to be a problem on a netbook since Intel 950 is still pretty much the standard (which actually is on a LOT of laptops and lower end desktop systems).
I can even run MacOS X on my netbook and I get full CoreGraphics.
The next gen will be Atom Duos which adds a couple of watts of power consumption, but essentially doubles the speed.
Realistically I could only see ARM based netbooks using Linux. For me it doesn't matter because that's all I use, but how well can they market this to the casual computer user?
Besides that, I personally haven't messed with getting flash to work with ARM, but if web surfers can't browse sites with full functionality these computers will be a flop.
@Jeff Lewis - I'm not speaking about power. Processor power doesn't really have anything to do with it. Flash itself is not coded to run on an ARM processor. I believe that a third party had it working, but I do not know how elegant it is. There is no doubt that in regards to speed and power, the Atom wins. However, an argument can be made that the much better battery life, coupled with a generally perceived notion that a netbook doesn't need the power is a big boon in regards to the ARM processor.
@CD - At the moment, an ARM processor is mostly limited to Linux, as the only Windows product that can be used is Windows CE. I think the casual user is turned off on Linux by name alone. I think that if somebody skinned a distro to look like XP and gave it to a casual netbook user, they would never even know it was Linux.
The Flash issue could spell trouble, but then again, is the iPhone a flop? ;)
No atom doesn't win... when considering proformace per watt.. which is what matters in a netbook also the next gen ARM Cortex A9 will probaby outright stomp even multicore Atoms
Casual users don't even know that Linux exists and if they do the have little preconceptions about if for not having used it
Flash does exist for ARM ... there is flash 9 on the nokia tablets and flash 10 has also been ported to ARM worst case senario you can still run Gnash which is largly flash 7 compliant and implements a large part of flash 8 and 9 with most of its failures caused by missing codecs
The problem is the interface and Xandros in general SUCK!!!! nobody wants a giant in your face clicky button POS... just give them a half normal looking desktop with a menu button marked "MENU" and they will be just fine and dandy (I have tested this myself... most people can use Linux just fine)....LXDE FTW easy as pie... http://lxde.org/
How big does it have to be to count as a netbook? I'll take my soon-to-ship Pandora over a first edition EEE PC any day.
* ARM® Cortex™-A8 600Mhz+ CPU running Linux
* 430-MHz TMS320C64x+™ DSP Core
* PowerVR SGX OpenGL 2.0 ES compliant 3D hardware
* 800x480 4.3" 16.7 million colours touchscreen LCD
* Wifi 802.11b/g, Bluetooth & High Speed USB 2.0 Host
* Dual SDHC card slots & SVideo TV output
* Dual Analogue and Digital gaming controls
* 43 button QWERTY and numeric keypad
* 10+ Hours battery life
http://openpandora.org/
I think the emerging battle of CPU architectures is good for the industry. Ultimately, it will boil down to the "die size, power consumption & cost per unit of processing". Depending on the application, some of these parameters will be more important than others.
One major advantage Linux has over other OSes is that it is CPU architecture agnostic. If in some cases ARM is desirable...fine. If in other cases x86 or PowerPC is desirable...fine.
One major advantage Android has over other "platforms" is that it leverages Linux's portability AND it uses the Dalvik VM so that applications can run on the selected CPU architecture without recompilation (i.e. the same app in the Android Market will run on ARM, x86, etc.).
No way is a 1.6Ghz Atom comparable to, or faster than, a 2.4Ghz Celeron. It's more comparable to a 1Ghz mobile Celeron. Flash does slow it down quite a bit too, depending on what you're doing with it.
I'd like to see much better battery life on ARM, but I don't believe that the CPU is the main energy-sucking component of a netbook. Powertop on Ubuntu 9.04 shows half as many CPU wakeups per second as on Ubuntu 8.10, yet the battery life is still virtually the same. Running an external monitor and turning off the backlight does far more for energy savings than making the processor more efficient.