tpearson-raptor

12 ms·

61.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
Right. For instance, the x86 architecture is published. If you try to build anything that can interpret it, you'll get sued by Intel or AMD (or both, if you really copied anything good). What is less widely considered is that emulati
62.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
An interesting offset for the latter is that you could develop your software on a high end system that matches the mobile architecture. Anyone who has has to fight with (/slow/) pure emulation of e.g. Android on ARM knows the pai
63.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
Shameless plug, but you can so grab a POWER9 micro VPS (and large ones too) without any human intervention at integricloud.com . Those are commercial / paid though, not free.
64.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
And what exactly do you call a machine that you are, by design, cryptographically locked out of, but a third party has access to? Put another way, would you call a car that I kept duplicate keys and retained title for, but said you could us
65.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
Having observed both sides of the industry first hand, I don't agree with that statement at all. Without going into debates on relative merit, RISC-V does its development in public while IBM until very recently has done it all behind
66.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
As a cloud services consumer, what guarantee (financial, legal, indemnification) will you grant me that your systems will not leak or otherwise tamper with my data, given that you use machines that I know for a fact you have no control over
67.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
What you can do with a trusted CPU domain is use FDE. FDE is standard practice for anyone even remotely concerned about security in the first place. So the firmware that matters -- the firmware that can subvert the system due to privilege
68.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
Both of those processors insist on you ceding full system control to the vendor in perpetuity, with a literal "skeleton key" that let's the vendor in and keeps you out (the centrally signed, unremovable ME/PSP). If this
69.
by tpearson-raptor 7y ago
I think you are overlooking one of the main reasons for avoiding Intel and AMD -- the ME and PSP, respectively. Intel or AMD has a master "skeleton" key that can basically unlock any of their computers post-sale, while simultaneo
70.
by tpearson-raptor 8y ago
For what it's worth, LLVMPipe normally picks up the basic 3D requirements without much trouble. When using Xorg though you definitely want to enable the 2D acceleration and disable Glamor; the chip is a fairly decent 2D framebuffer. O
71.
by tpearson-raptor 8y ago
Have you seen https://www.spec.org/cpu2017/results/res2018q3/cpu2017-20180... from back in July? There are more submissions as well if you want to browse around a bit.
72.
by tpearson-raptor 8y ago
All POWER products offer SMT. The POWER9 OpenPOWER chips are all 4 threads per core (SMT4), so a 4 core device presents 16 logical cores to the OS. POWER's hardware threading system is also unique and has high performance compared to
73.
by tpearson-raptor 8y ago
Not really blob free then, is it? ;-) Do you get full documentation of the processor internals and board schematics with that kit? How about an owner-controlled secure boot, or is that remaining blob vendor-locked / vendor signature
74.
by tpearson-raptor 9y ago
No, it is not isolated and it is certainly not disabled. It must run as part of the initial platform boot; whether or not they politely ask it to shut itself down after boot is irrelevant to the core claim being made that the ME is &quot
75.
by tpearson-raptor 9y ago
Note that the ME still runs on their platforms. They are not being honest about that fact.
76.
by tpearson-raptor 9y ago
Yet another reason owner-controlled machines like the Talos™ II [0] are so important. Yes, it may cost a bit more up front, but what's the cost again of having your data stolen and then, especially with the older machines here, having
77.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
Some of the Taiwanese manufacturers do make OpenPOWER machines. However, the pricing is in the same ballpark as Talos™ and you don't get anywhere near the complete owner control that Talos™ offers. Look into the closed-source BMC on
78.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
Hi, Timothy here from Raptor Engineering. As mentioned on a different comment, we are investigating adding a lower-spec machine to the lineup due to popular demand. We had not anticipated the level of demand for a pre-built workstation wit
79.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
Regarding the cost of non-consumer hardware, especially hardware in the $1k range, I encourage you to check out the presentation entitled "Talos™, OpenPOWER™, and the World Beyond x86" at https://www.crowdsupply.com&#x2
80.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
The cost difference between SAS and SATA isn't all that much, and SAS has some nice benefits especially when used in a RAID type configuration. We see this first run as targeting more niche and corporate / government type use case
81.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
Hi, Timothy from Raptor Engineering here. Given the strong and consistent feedback on this we are looking at adding a more minimal pre-assembled option. Most likely this would involve scaling the RAM count down and dropping the GPU to a mi
82.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
We have not worked out the exact specifications of the virtual machines at this time; we need to balance usability against overall cost and that depends to some extent on the number of signups we receive. Initial targets were a dual core VM
83.
by tpearson-raptor 10y ago
Hi, Timothy here from Raptor Engineering. The lesser expensive servers do not use the same firmware as Talos™ or even the more expensive IBM systems. The cheaper machines reduce cost by using proprietary firmware components wherever possib