$160 PowerPC Computer

[the_leander]

Sadly, my earlier suspcions regarding the lack of expandability have been borne out, as the following image from revogear shows, it doesn't have the requisite port.



So again, sorry chaps, but this machine, even if you could port OS4 to it, would be utterly useless in that capacity.

Another thing is that it is extremely cheep, even with a 40Gb hard drive, cheeper even, then many of its x86 counterparts in the same market (portable network fileservers).

[whabang]

There is always VNC.

[Dan]

Or this:
http://nvplanet.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2551

Telegnosis? USB 2.0 VGA adapter allows to display 640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768 resolutions with 8/16/32-bit color depth. The device will not be suitable for gamers as it does not sport Direct3D, however, the target market for the product seems to be business-oriented customers who need some additional capabilities from their notebooks or desktops.

Or a direct LCD-driverinterface for USB, I bet that there is many of those things around.

[carls]

mdma:

It could be something for the kids christmas stocking if packaged up and marketed right.

No, it wouldn't :-)
You do of course realize this would require that it's capable of running at least Quake 3? Many of today's (cheap) high-spec  (compared to this machine) PCs are aimed directly at young gamers. It would be like getting a SNES when you wanted a PS2...

MarkTime:

Amazing how this product exists, when we've been assured repeatedly and vigorously, that economies of 'scale' make it impossible to sell a PowerPC box at anything but two or three times more expensive than your typical PC.

This is a low-spec 200MHz 603-based computer without graphics, case, keyboard, monitor etc. It's just the MoBo. The economics you're refering to probably discussed at least G3-based systems with AGP. Check out Apple's pricing and then compare it to what you get in a PC for the same amount of money. I'm just discussing hardware here, not which OS is better. Apple are significantly more expensive. For the price of an entry-level iMac you can get a 3GHz towered Dell PC with a stand-alone 17" flat screen, DVD+/-RW, twice as much memory and a better graphics card, complete with Windows XP and MS Works.

Bottom line: For $160 you can get an Asus MoBo including an Intel Celeron at 2.4GHz. I can't see why you'd want to buy a 200Mhz single-board computer for the same price unless it was for the geek-coolness factor that someone mentioned earlier.

[BigBenAussie]

Of course it doesn't make sense....
Since when have Amigans been rational?

But my question is, apart from getting Hyperion to do it, what would you have to do to get it to run OS4?
VNC would be fine...Who's expecting to run cutting edge games? What games?

A while ago made a post about a uA1 leeching off another machine, in terms of using its monitor(VNC), HD(networking) and other peripherals(mouse and keyboard). Would this not be a cheap way to do it? And lower the cost of entry in the extreme. I'll just set it up next to my PC, hey, why not even my A1000(an upgrade?), and if its small enough I could even carry it around with my laptop...In fact I have a cheap underspecced x86 laptop which would be enough.

I mean, you all had the impulse to buy it like me..It practically costs nothing..Imagine if the software existed to take advantage of it....even if it was gumby... Hell. It would solve a lot of problems in terms of shipping development boards because its dirt cheap really.

You know, this would be a real testament to OS4 if it could even accomplish such a feat of running on this machine.

Or maybe its just hairbrained. Well of course...
But if you're going to be underspecced with your uA1 anyway, why not go the whole way. Err.. Maybe that didn't come out right.

Ok. Going back to my happy place now.

[the_leander]

carls wrote:


Bottom line: For $160 you can get an Asus MoBo including an Intel Celeron at 2.4GHz. I can't see why you'd want to buy a 200Mhz single-board computer for the same price unless it was for the geek-coolness factor that someone mentioned earlier.

Yes you could get that Celeron and mobo, but what about psu, memory and case? :-P

Seriously though, you're comparing apples (lol) and oranges here, this isn't a desktop machine, it was never designed to be and never will be. If you compare it to similar things in its market, it compares favourably, the market this is aimed at is a standalone headless file server. You set it up, then leave it untill the hard drive dies a few years later. Its an inexpensive solution compared to traditional file servers, its quiet, simple and small.

You may not understand the appeal of such a thing, but I can imagine that this would look very tempting to someone who is in a small buisness looking to store/backup all of their information away from their desktops. You'd be paying more then this a year to pay for it to be stored off site in a lot of cases. Myself I'm tempted because I do have an awful lot of data that I really should look into finding a means of backing up, though I suspect that the missus would have something to say about it ;-)

[carls]

@the_leander:
I know there are applications for such hardware, but in this thread it was discussed for use as an all-purpose home computer.

I _am_ employed in a small business, although we have other solutions for our network storage. Anyway, if was to buy some kind of NAS I'd probably pick something from Lacie or IOMega rather than having to build my own :-)

[the_leander]

carls wrote:
@the_leander:
I know there are applications for such hardware, but in this thread it was discussed for use as an all-purpose home computer.

I _am_ employed in a small business, although we have other solutions for our network storage. Anyway, if was to buy some kind of NAS I'd probably pick something from Lacie or IOMega rather than having to build my own :-)

For comparing this NAS to a general purpose home computer, well as I said thats rather pointless as I think you'd probably agree. Especially with price comparasons

As was pointed out, a more consumer centric version is available in the form of the buffalo linkstation for £156 with a 120Gb hd. Which imho is a pretty good price, indeed I've seen external usb hd chassis with the same capacity hd's for more then that (quite a bit more as it happens).

[Hammer]

the_leander wrote:

CyberStorm wrote:
Even if someone made OS4 to run on that machine, would you really like such a low spec OS4 machine?

And even if they did, you wouldn't be able to see anything on it, because it has no graphics hardware, nore the possibility of adding it.

If developers are to develop for such a machine, there will probably be a lot of programs/games out not using the full potential of the faster A1.

People not knowing the Amiga that good will see this low end machine, and will never geting interested in the Amiga of that reason.

If developers tried to port AmigaOS and assorted dev kits to this device, end users on the other hand, around the globe would be left scratching their heads wondering where to plug in a monitor/tv.

And about the price it's still not cheaper than a x86 machine anyway, and would of that reason not be able to sell any bigger numbers anyway as an AOS 4 machine.

But as an SetTop box, for internet, DVD's, MP3's and maybe simple videoediting, it could be interesting.

Actually for the job its doing its cheeper then most of the other stuff out there (including X86), the job its doing is as an all in one fileserver. It would be as useless as an STB or video editing as it would for use as a desktop machine for the reason outlined above - it has no video hardware, nore the expandability to add it (no pci or similar).

One could build a similar priced box based on an ASrock(SIS chipset) motherboard and K7 Sempr0n.

[the_leander]

One could build a similar priced box based on an ASrock(SIS chipset) motherboard and K7 Sempr0n.

Yes, provided you didn't buy a case, a hard disk, or power supply. But lets go beyond that, this thing is smaller then a Sega Dreamcast, to my knolledge there are no motherboards for socket A kit of that size. Then theres power usage, this thing as a whole uses about as much power as 120mm fan + the hd, the cpu alone in the system you're describing would run many many times over in terms of power used...

Yes you could do it, but the point of NAS devices is that they use the absolute minimum in hardware to supply the services they do. To get an AthlonXP or sempron based system is just overkill and tbh a compete system would cost more then the NAS with a 120Gb hd.

To do the job of a NAS, the best thing to do the job is a NAS, to press into service a full desktop computer is to miss the point about the NAS - its simplicity.