SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The goal of the EOMA (Embedded Open Modular Architecture) project is to introduce the idea of being ethically responsible about both the ecological and the financial resources required to design, manufacture, acquire and maintain our personal computing devices. The EOMA68 standard is a freely-accessible, royalty-free, unencumbered hardware standard formulated and tested over the last five years around the ultra-simple philosophy of "just plug it in: it will work".
With devices built following this standard, one can upgrade the CPU-card (consisting of CPU, RAM and some local storage) of a device while keeping the same housing (e.g. laptop). One can also use the CPU-card in different devices (e.g. unplug CPU-card from laptop, plug into desktop); or use a replaced/discarded CPU-card from a laptop for NAS storage or a micro-server. There are housings currently available for a laptop (can be 3D-printed in full, or in part to replace parts that break) and a micro-desktop; and there are plans for others like routers or tablets in the future.
There are multiple articles talking about this project and analyzing the hardware, for example from ThinkPenguin, CNXSoft or EngadgetNG. There is also a recent live-streamed video introducing the project.
(Score: 2) by Foobar Bazbot on Tuesday August 02 2016, @03:01AM
In previous discussions about EOMA, I've spent a lot of time explaining how it appeals to different parties. This is important, because no matter how appealing something is to consumers, if manufacturers don't want it, it won't succeed, and vice versa. The whole point is to have an ecosystem with lots of CPU cards and lots of devices (of all sorts) to use them in -- and that means it has to be appealing to everyone involved. So here's an explanation of why I think this standard has a chance, because it does stand to benefit everyone.
End user -- relatively non-technical
It's all about future-proofing, upgrading, and flexibility. You upgrade the CPU card in one system (let's say a tablet or netbook), and not only do you not have to repurchase the rest of the system (e.g. screen, battery, mechanical chassis, keyboard) along with it, you also get to hand the previous CPU card down to the next-most-demanding application (maybe your spouse's tablet, maybe an old tablet with a lousy screen that lives on your nightstand as an alarm clock). Or, conversely, if you want a new tablet with a better screen, you can get it and move your old CPU card over, keeping your data and settings all right there, and not paying for the CPU card again.
Or maybe you buy an EOMA68-compatible digital photo frame. (Are digital photo frames still a thing? Seemed everyone was buying them for their mothers a few years ago...) It has a couple USB ports, a screen, and the dumbest/cheapest EOMA68 card imaginable. Displays pictures off USB drives, and can't do much else. But when you upgrade your laptop, you end up with a spare "last year's" EOMA68 card -- plug that into your photo frame, plug a mouse and keyboard in the USB ports, and you've got a little desktop where visiting friends/family can check their email and such. (And of course, it keeps displaying your pictures as a screensaver.)
Additionally, there's some pretty nifty market shifts that EOMA68 might just make happen. For instance, a dumb TV or monitor can be outfitted with an EOMA68 slot for very low cost, and sold as a "smart-ready" TV, or sold with a pre-installed CPU card (with video-streaming software) as a smart TV. I'm thinking the simplicity of having one hardware build for both smart and non-smart models, and the marketing gimmick of "smart-ready", could make this obsolete both dumb TVs and inflexible smart TVs altogether. (And as I'm not a fan of current "smart TVs", I'd love the ability to unplug their "smart" module, and plug in my own EOMA68 card running desktop Linux.)
Swapping one card in and out of multiple devices may be too much hassle to matter for most folks -- with ubiquitous internet connection, it seems an easier sell to just synchronize data through the cloud rather than plugging a card and rebooting to make apps, data, and settings persist between e.g. laptop and tablet. I like this capability, and believe I'd use it, but I'm hardly a typical user.
Hardware hacker
Of course there's the simple stuff, where you use the EOMA68 CPU card and a minimal breakout board in much the same way people use single-board computers, to add standalone capability to peripherals (e.g. 3D printer) that would normally be connected to a computer. Again, what you gain is flexibilty, and "free" trickle-down upgrades.
But what about bigger projects -- ever want to make a laptop that suits you just right -- this keyboard, that display, maybe you really like a certain hinge mechanism, etc.? The casework's not insurmountably hard, or maybe you can even modify an existing laptop, but the big hurdle is the motherboard. Any worthwhile CPU is a pretty big BGA package, and you probably need 4 layers just to route all the signals out from under it. A bunch of those signals are very high frequency, and that makes routing them over any distance more complicated. Almost all projects of this sort end up using a mass-produced single-board computer of some sort, such as a Raspberry Pi or BeagleBone. In a sense, an EOMA68 CPU card fills the same role -- it's has the BGA routing and high-bandwidth routing taken care of, and exposes a neat interface to connect your PCB to. But it beats the currently-popular options two ways. First, you're tied into one platform by your choice -- if you go with R.Pi, you can't swap it for a BBB later, without redoing your PCB. (You may be able to upgrade to a newer flavor of R.Pi, but that's a very limited selection.) Likewise if you choose EOMA68, you can't go with the other options, but the difference is, there's not just one line of EOMA68 cards. Anyone can make a new EOMA68 card, with whatever SoC they fancy, so you'll have a decent selection available. Second benefit, depending on the PCMCIA socket used and the thickness of CPU card used, is reduced thickness compared to the typical SBCs with board-stacking connectors.
Manufacturer (of tablets/netbooks/etc.)
Reduced fixed costs related to design and prototyping. When a hot new SoC turns the market upside down, making a tablet with last years processor becomes a losing proposition. So these manufacturers scramble to turn out a new board with the new SoC, incurring lots of design and prototyping costs. And if they're not fast enough, they may not sell enough to make those costs back before the next change leaves them playing catch up again. But with EOMA68, you can keep shipping the same tablet, whether you sell it sans CPU card, or just ship it with a different CPU card. Likewise, when you do redesign (maybe for a higher-resolution screen, or perhaps just to make the casework look more like the latest iPad), you have less design costs because you've left the hard bit (SoC and friends) for someone else.
In addition, there are niches that go untapped now, because it is believed (often correctly!) that they won't generate enough sales to cover the fixed costs. For instance, I loved the Fujitsu U820; for those who don't know, it's a paperback-sized mini-laptop, convertible, 5-6" screen, and -- this is great -- a trackpoint-ish pointing device mounted where it's usable in tablet and laptop mode, so you can actually use the convertible mode without smudging the screen up. The screen was too dim for outdoors, the CPU was slow (800MHz Atom), and it had a resistive touchscreen (principally for use with the included stylus), but I'd honestly pay $500-$1000 for one with the CPU and screen of a Samsung Note 3 or newer (includes Wacom digitizer as well as capacitive touch, though I could do without the latter), and a normal desktop OS. This will never happen -- it's just not worth designing it for me and the few hundred others who love tiny laptops. But between the reduced cost of producing one run of these, and the increased utility to buyers (because it won't be obsolete in 2 years, you'll just put in new CPU cards) translating into higher prices, some company could turn a neat profit that just wasn't there before. (Or perhaps that niche is still too small to be profitable. Even if so, you can see how reducing fixed costs shifts the balance toward small batches to clean up on niche interests.)
Manufacturer (of CPU cards)
Volume, volume, volume. To make a new CPU card for some new SoC, you've got fixed costs similar to doing the board for a new tablet with the new SoC. But whereas you'll never be a particularly huge part of the market for tablets with a given SoC, it's entirely possible that the first manufacturer to market with a CPU card for that SoC will have the whole market. It'll be low-margin, but high volume. (It's also possible that SoC vendors will produce their own CPU cards -- after all, what better way to get people to buy your SoC than to package it as a complete drop-in module.)
(Score: 1) by mafm on Tuesday August 02 2016, @09:31PM
Loved this comment as well, thanks for sharing your insights!