5 ms·

Intel announces Edison, a computer the size of an SD card.

85 points by zachlatta 13y ago

melling 13y ago
Is anyone working on pairing these small devices with keyboards, mice, tablets, monitors, televisions, glasses, etc? Everything has to be wireless, of course. I'd like a keychain computer that I could drop next to whatever peripherals I happen to be near.
- null_ptr 13y ago
  Would you trust whatever peripherals you're near not to keylog all you type and screenshot all you see?
  - lukeqsee 13y ago
    No, you couldn't. However, I doubt trust/security would be a motivation at that scale. It's essentially equivalent to carrying around a bootable flash drive.
  - nl 13y ago
    What a pointless comment. Of course there are always security problems around using untrusted peripherals. Hell, there are security problems around using trusted peripherals. That doesn't mean the possibilities shouldn't be explored. (Incidentally, I don't think this is a very interesting use-case. We can already do that with phones, and I never see anyone doing it. But it isn't security issues that stop people doing it.
brink 13y ago
I hope the device is open and encourages hacking. But seeing that they're putting an app store on it, (I'm guessing for long term profit) they probably have little incentive to do so.
- ajays 13y ago
  FTA: "It's powered by a dual-core Quark SOC, runs Linux, and has built-in Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connectivity"... If it runs Linux, there's a good chance it's open (or could be made open).
- benjamincburns 13y ago
  They're building an app store for the platform (Quark), not necessarily for this explicit device (Edison). Chances are they're using the app store to approach several major OEMs to say "use this SoC, it'll run your x86 software, and it even has an app store!" There's nothing stopping you from taking one of these and loading whatever you want onto it, if you can even get your hands on one (you can't).
malkia 13y ago
Just put in a mouse, and add three more keys.
- caprad 13y ago
  Ctrl-alt-del? No, this runs windows.
nl 13y ago
Interesting. The Quark core 32nm (14nm by end of 2014), x86, core power consumption under 100mW[1]. Assuming performance scales with size/transistor count, that's probably 1/5th-1/10th the performance of Atom (I'm guessing - they claim 400MHz as a max speed at launch). That's very competitive with ARM at the same size, but ARM doesn't have this "complete computer on a board" at that size (AFAIK). [1] http://www.anandtech.com/show/7305/intel-announces-quark-soc-a-tiny-soc-for-tiny-devices http://www.anandtech.com/show/7305/intel-announces-quark-soc...
- wmf 13y ago
  Eye-Fi did that a while ago: http://hackaday.com/2009/02/01/eye-fi-teardown/ http://hackaday.com/2009/02/01/eye-fi-teardown/
- benjamincburns 13y ago
  > but ARM doesn't have this "complete computer on a board" at that size (AFAIK). Knowing the industry terminology helps: https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=arm+system+on+module https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=arm+system+on+module
  - nl 13y ago
    Yeah, that's not the same thing. Or rather, it could be, but usually you need to do extra work (and buy extra parts) and then order a few thousand. To quote: Unlike SBCs, COMs [computer-on-module] typically lack real-world ports, and extend their I/O through a connector that supports compatible carrier boards based on standards like COM Express, QSeven, and SMARC. Others use proprietary connectors, often based on a 144-pin SODIMM layout, designed to work only with the company's own carrier boards. http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-mobile/mobile-linux/712557-10-new-linux-ready-embedded-arm-modules http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-mobile/mobile-linux/71255... (Although, to be fair I am assuming that the original article is accurate in stating which ports are available on the Intel version)
    - benjamincburns 13y ago
      As someone who's integrated several SOCs, SOMs, COMs, and SBCs, I promise the only special part about this is that it's x86. Pentium class power has been available in these kinds of form factors for quite a while. Further, the OP doesn't really say anything about ports, or availability, and forget about "ports," really. The real difficulty with these is power management. PMICs are getting nice and small, and I'm betting there are a few LDOs on board for generating core voltages, but otherwise all of the real power management will be off board as there isn't much room for inductors on an SD form factor board. $20 says this is just a cute reference implementation to give to their field application engineers so they can get the OEMs jazzed about Quark. [Edit: The fact that this is an SD form factor is extra fodder for this argument. This thing doesn't go into an SD card slot, or speak SD, but because SD is something everyone thinks of as "tiny but huge," some marketer somewhere said "make it the size/shape of an SD." For example, the last SOM I integrated (for a computer vision application, built around a 466MHz ARM9 SOC) was of similar size, but of much more useful shape.]
DonGateley 13y ago
If you are a Raspberry Pi fan or even an Arduino fan this is really big news. I'm already pausing to consider changing course on something I'm developing.
- benjamincburns 13y ago
  Sorry to sound like a curmudgeon, but this shouldn't even register on hobbyist's radar unless Intel also announces that it'll be selling this direct to consumers. These types of things are built to market new processor platforms to OEMs. That doesn't mean that some hobbyist-friendly OEM can't build something nifty out of this, but having dealt with Intel before, chances are for someone small enough to be hobbyist-friendly, the folks at Intel won't even chuckle as they ignore the ringing phone.
z3phyr 13y ago
Off topic : In the race of making processors faster and smaller, are we heading to the direction of more power efficient analog computers again?
nawariata 13y ago
Technological progress have spoiled me, I was disappointed it wasn't the size of a micro SD card.

85 points by zachlatta 13y ago

Is anyone working on pairing these small devices with keyboards, mice, tablets, monitors, televisions, glasses, etc? Everything has to be wireless, of course. I'd like a keychain computer that I could drop next to whatever peripherals I happen to be near.

null_ptr 13y ago
Would you trust whatever peripherals you're near not to keylog all you type and screenshot all you see?
- lukeqsee 13y ago
  No, you couldn't. However, I doubt trust/security would be a motivation at that scale. It's essentially equivalent to carrying around a bootable flash drive.
- nl 13y ago
  What a pointless comment. Of course there are always security problems around using untrusted peripherals. Hell, there are security problems around using trusted peripherals. That doesn't mean the possibilities shouldn't be explored. (Incidentally, I don't think this is a very interesting use-case. We can already do that with phones, and I never see anyone doing it. But it isn't security issues that stop people doing it.

brink 13y ago

I hope the device is open and encourages hacking. But seeing that they're putting an app store on it, (I'm guessing for long term profit) they probably have little incentive to do so.

ajays 13y ago
FTA: "It's powered by a dual-core Quark SOC, runs Linux, and has built-in Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connectivity"... If it runs Linux, there's a good chance it's open (or could be made open).
benjamincburns 13y ago
They're building an app store for the platform (Quark), not necessarily for this explicit device (Edison). Chances are they're using the app store to approach several major OEMs to say "use this SoC, it'll run your x86 software, and it even has an app store!" There's nothing stopping you from taking one of these and loading whatever you want onto it, if you can even get your hands on one (you can't).

malkia 13y ago

Just put in a mouse, and add three more keys.

caprad 13y ago
Ctrl-alt-del? No, this runs windows.

nl 13y ago

Interesting. The Quark core 32nm (14nm by end of 2014), x86, core power consumption under 100mW[1]. Assuming performance scales with size/transistor count, that's probably 1/5th-1/10th the performance of Atom (I'm guessing - they claim 400MHz as a max speed at launch). That's very competitive with ARM at the same size, but ARM doesn't have this "complete computer on a board" at that size (AFAIK). [1] http://www.anandtech.com/show/7305/intel-announces-quark-soc-a-tiny-soc-for-tiny-devices http://www.anandtech.com/show/7305/intel-announces-quark-soc...

wmf 13y ago
Eye-Fi did that a while ago: http://hackaday.com/2009/02/01/eye-fi-teardown/ http://hackaday.com/2009/02/01/eye-fi-teardown/
benjamincburns 13y ago
> but ARM doesn't have this "complete computer on a board" at that size (AFAIK). Knowing the industry terminology helps: https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=arm+system+on+module https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=arm+system+on+module
- nl 13y ago
  Yeah, that's not the same thing. Or rather, it could be, but usually you need to do extra work (and buy extra parts) and then order a few thousand. To quote: Unlike SBCs, COMs [computer-on-module] typically lack real-world ports, and extend their I/O through a connector that supports compatible carrier boards based on standards like COM Express, QSeven, and SMARC. Others use proprietary connectors, often based on a 144-pin SODIMM layout, designed to work only with the company's own carrier boards. http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-mobile/mobile-linux/712557-10-new-linux-ready-embedded-arm-modules http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-mobile/mobile-linux/71255... (Although, to be fair I am assuming that the original article is accurate in stating which ports are available on the Intel version)
  - benjamincburns 13y ago
    As someone who's integrated several SOCs, SOMs, COMs, and SBCs, I promise the only special part about this is that it's x86. Pentium class power has been available in these kinds of form factors for quite a while. Further, the OP doesn't really say anything about ports, or availability, and forget about "ports," really. The real difficulty with these is power management. PMICs are getting nice and small, and I'm betting there are a few LDOs on board for generating core voltages, but otherwise all of the real power management will be off board as there isn't much room for inductors on an SD form factor board. $20 says this is just a cute reference implementation to give to their field application engineers so they can get the OEMs jazzed about Quark. [Edit: The fact that this is an SD form factor is extra fodder for this argument. This thing doesn't go into an SD card slot, or speak SD, but because SD is something everyone thinks of as "tiny but huge," some marketer somewhere said "make it the size/shape of an SD." For example, the last SOM I integrated (for a computer vision application, built around a 466MHz ARM9 SOC) was of similar size, but of much more useful shape.]

DonGateley 13y ago

If you are a Raspberry Pi fan or even an Arduino fan this is really big news. I'm already pausing to consider changing course on something I'm developing.

benjamincburns 13y ago
Sorry to sound like a curmudgeon, but this shouldn't even register on hobbyist's radar unless Intel also announces that it'll be selling this direct to consumers. These types of things are built to market new processor platforms to OEMs. That doesn't mean that some hobbyist-friendly OEM can't build something nifty out of this, but having dealt with Intel before, chances are for someone small enough to be hobbyist-friendly, the folks at Intel won't even chuckle as they ignore the ringing phone.

z3phyr 13y ago

Off topic : In the race of making processors faster and smaller, are we heading to the direction of more power efficient analog computers again?

nawariata 13y ago

Technological progress have spoiled me, I was disappointed it wasn't the size of a micro SD card.