Nvidia Tegra3 launch imminent. Intel, you did this to yourself.

Reading about the likely launch of Tegra3 at Mobile World Congress 2011 and seeing this video, one cannot help wondering how big a mistake Intel made when denied Atom hardware interfaces from Nvidia some time ago. Doing that, it practically forced Nvidia to abandon mobile-x86 solutions and pour all of its resources into Tegra/ARM development.

Nvidia has recently announced its Project Denver effort which also shows how seriously the graphics company wants to transform into an all-out computer technology company shipping mobile, desktop and server processors as well not only graphics solutions.

As a result, Intel will have to face not only AMD in the desktop/server segment but a big-name ARM technologist as well. (And several smaller ones like Nufront)

Tegra3 is not well known yet, but some guesses can be made:

• Quad-core Cortex-A9 symmetric multi processing for generic application code execution


• Likely at least 1Ghz top, possible up to 1.5 Ghz, dynamic frequency scaling and individual core-power-off


• Geforce 8 or 9 level graphics core, likely with high-profile 1080p playback and encoding


• Support for Linux and Android


• Possibly produced on a <40nm process (GlobalFoundries 28nm anyone?)

If Nvidia can produce this on the GlobalFoundries 28nm process (or similar), we can be quite certain that the new SOC will still be viable for smartphones and will be an extremely appealing solution for tablets and Motorola Atrix-like phone/netbook/tablet modular solutions.

It will make Moorestown Atoms a very-very hard sell for Intel in the mobile phone and tablet space since the computing-power advantage of Moorestown is gone and Tegra3 will be much more efficient (being an all-out ARM solution). Android-centered OEMs will most likely go with ARM anyway and if there is a big-name producer like Nvidia with a powerful solution for their premium products, they will certainly pick that up instead of the Intel gear.

And this is only the mobile space. When Project Denver from Nvidia and Nufront start selling ARM based server SOCs, Intel will have to fight a battle in the datacenter which was absolutely home-turf so far.

All of this may not have happened at all (or would have happened years later, giving Moorestown a chance) if Intel had not chosen to deny Nvidia the hardware interfaces for building Ion2. They switched a huge threat and possible cut-throat competition in every computing segment for a very short-term gain in one segment.

Was it worth it Intel?

Motorola Atrix vs the Always Innovating Smart Book

It is not an overstatement that the Motorola Atrix smartphone was one of the bright stars of CES 2011. An often-mentioned, breakthrough feature of the  Atrix is its modularity, namely that it can be placed into a netbook dock which gives it work-time (and battery recharge) and a desktop-like work environment (Linux based).

It is worth mentioning that this concept is not brand new and that a smaller company called Always Innovating (AI) has a similar, even more modular product: the Smart Book.

The main difference between the two products is that the computing core of the Smart Book is only a MID, not a real mobile phone like the Atrix.

The advantages of the Atrix over the Smart Book (SB):

• The computing core of the Atrix is a real, usable mobile phone, not only a MID (IP phone as AI calls it) as with the SB. The Atrix phone is a high-end Android phone with beautiful, high-res screen (comparable to the iPhone4).

• The computing core of the Atrix has 1GB of RAM and a powerful Tegra2 (dual-core Cortex A9) instead of the last gen, slow Cortex-A8 SOC and only 512Mb RAM in the Smart Book.

• Computing core of the Atrix has a built-in 3G modem (with strong HSUPA and HSDPA) while the SB has only wifi radio and requires you to use an external 3G modem to connect to the internet when on-the-go.

The advantages of the Smart Book (SB) over the Atrix:

• Much more modular. The SB has tablet jacket AND keyboard/netbook dock for the tablet jacket, while the Atrix only has a netbook jacket for the phone. The SB's tablet jacket has a capacitive touch interface


• The SB has real a real desktop operating system (Ubuntu) running when in desktop mode while the the Atrix has only Webtop (that only looks like a full blown desktop but it is only a Splashtop-like quick-linux OS, so it is limited to a selection of programs and is not easy to extend with apps).


• The SB has 2 inner USB ports for replaceable 3G modem or storage key which can always ship safely within the netbook dock (no protrusions)


• The SB's netbook dock can be used as an independent bluetooth keyboard


• The SB's tablet screen can be used as a secondary display of a desktop (DisplayLink)


• The SB has a dockable (into the talet) HDMI to USB adapter (DisplayLink)

In order to be the perfect companion, the Atrix needs to:

• Increase its modularity by separating the netbook dock into a tablet and a keyboard stand or at least release a tablet dock as well


• Upgrade the Webtop desktop environment to a real, powerful desktop Linux (aka Ubuntu 10.04) or at least ensure that Ubuntu can also be used in place of Webtop. It is important that the user be able to switch between Android and Ubuntu real time

The Smart Book could be a worthy contender to the Atrix by:

• Upgrading the computing core to a dual-core OMAP4 with 1GB of speedy RAM


• The computing core needs to be a real-word Android mobile phone with a strong HSPA data modem

I believe Motorola is in a better position to make the Atrix a one-stop computing solution but I also root for Always Innovating to make the Smart Book a successful product.

Both products clearly mark the future: modular, mobile computing for everyone.

Revised specifications for the Notion Ink Adam

As the Adam is approaching its public release, some parts of the specification have changed compared to the originally published spec and there is now some information about the target pricing as well. Of course any of it is subject to change. Some of this information is not even corrected on the official Notion Ink website but was posted on their blog.

The bezel of the tablet has been slightly enlarged (as can be seen on the picture):



There will be four base variants of the Adam:

• PixelQi screen, wi-fi


• PixelQi screen, wi-fi, 3G cellular modem


• Ordinary LCD screen, wi-fi


• Ordinary LCD screen, wi-fi, 3G cellular modem

Both the PixelQi and the ordinary LCD screen will have capacitive, multi-touch interface and 1024x600 resolution, anti-glare coating (matte finish). This is especially useful for reading and outdoor use. PixelQi variant is usable in direct, strong sunlight.

There is no info yet on the HSDPA/HSUPA speeds for the 3G cellular modem.

For internal storage, 16 and 32 GB flash will be selectable.

Common specification elements:

• Nvidia Tegra2 System On Chip operating at 1Ghz (dual-core ARM Cortex-A9)


• 1 GB of RAM (DDR2, 667Mhz)


• WLAN 802.11 b/g/n (previously it was not known whether it will have "n" as well)


• Bluetooth 2.1 EDR with A2DP (for stereo bluetooth headsets)


• External loudspeakers (expected to be good quality for enjoyable video playback), external microphone, headphone and microphone jack


• 3.2 Mpixel swivel camera which will be usable for both taking photos and video calls


• 2 normal size USB ports and 1 mini-USB port


• HDMI output


• microSD card slot


• Docking port


• 3-axis accelerometer


• Ambient light sensor and automatic screen backlight adjustment (this will have a big, positive impact on the battery runtime)


• Manual LCD back-light switch (most useful for the PixelQi variant)


• Standalone GPS chip and antennea (with support for A-GPS quick positioning). The Adam will be capable for navigation without 3G network coverage


• Sound volume keys


• Backside trackpad (this is an interesting part, check the videos on Youtube)


• 24 Wh battery (3-cell configuration). Expected runtime is 15 hours for wifi browsing (recently reported on the blog), 140 hours of listening to audio, more than a week standby


• Operating system is Android Froyo (2.2) with a custom, tablet-enhanced user interface

It is not yet known whether the Adam will have a digital compass (for better navigation and augmented reality apps). It has been asked on the Notion Ink blog comments but no confirmation yet. It would be very much logical to have it in a machine with this hardware level but the long-time omission from the specs indicates otherwise.

Target end-user prices are between $400 and $500 for the 4 variants in the US. Their target is to keep even the fully loaded variant below the price of the entry level iPad.

Availability/release of the Adam is not finalized, but the Early Access Program winners (developers) are expected to have their machines shipped around November 15. Public release should happen soon after in order to make the Adam available for the Christmas shopping season.

Sources:

• Notion Ink Blog


• Notion Ink Company Website

DDR2

Official Linux development kit for Tegra2

It's been a while since I reported that Nvidia would support Linux on the Tegra2 development board. At that time, "support" meant an internal, non-public OS image for Nvidia developers and a promise  for an official, public Linux Development Kit (LDK) to be released "soon". Unfortunately, things were only crawling along since then so some of the prospective Tegra2 developers got quite frustrated with the lack of an official LDK for this advanced ARM hardware.

Finally, Nvidia developers caught up with the demand and released the first version of the official LDK dubbed as Linux for Tegra (L4T). The announcements on the Tegra2 developer forums is here.

Now, we can hope that this development kit can become the basis of targeted Linux distributions for the upcoming Tegra2 based machines such as the Notion Ink Adam and the Boxee Box.

I, for one, will only buy a Tegra2 tablet or smartbook if there is realistic chance that I will see a well working, full-Linux distro on it sometime soon. I may use Android on them for a while but I certainly think that such powerful hardware demands a proper, full-Linux operating system on it. I will be happy to use MeeGo, Ubuntu Unity or some other touch-oriented desktop-GUI and its widgets but absolutely expect to run OpenOffice, Firefox and other powerful apps when I attach a keyboard to the machine.

Toshiba AC100 smartbook: with Android but why?

The AC100 smartbook, recently announced by Toshiba, has some intriguing features, worth to blog about. First of all, it is built around Nvidia's Tegra2 system-on-chip (SOC). The Tegra2 is a powerful, ARM SOC with two generic application processing cores and integrated media cores (AV decoding/encoding...etc). The AC100 is the most promising netbook form-factor machine with Tegra2 to date. (Of course there are a lot of Tegra2 based systems announced, but those are mostly tablets). Smartbooks already on the market (HP Airlife, Sharp Netwalker), suffer from lack of performance (due to a combination of underpowered, single-core, Cortex A8-level SOCs and/or slow RAM) and are not considered as breakthrough products (at least not in the blogosphere).

The AC100 has a chance to be a successful product in the netbook/smartbook category. Although the hardware has some weaknesses (only 512Mb of RAM instead of at least 1Gb, only one USB port, very small resolution LCD), it has a solid brand name written on it, and the Nvidia foundations are appealing.

I expect the factory installed Android 2.1 perform acceptably but I don't think it is the ideal OS for this device. Android's touch oriented GUI won't shine on the AC100 simply because the machine lacks a touch-screen and Android's software selection is simply no match for this hardware.

Laptop-like smartbooks with keyboards (like the AC100) are much better served with a full-desktop Linux due to the fact, that on these devices, buyers will expect full-fledged applications like OpenOffice, Thunderbird, Firefox…etc. Android would be very limiting for the use cases expected from a netbook/smartbook (editing complex text documents, spreadsheets, using a full-fledged browser, email client…etc). Tegra2 with 1Gb of fast RAM could run OpenOffice and other desktop software with good performance. Instead, it will be reduced to run mini, Android versions of the real stuff (what is available for Android instead of OO and such). I believe, at this point, Android is much more suitable for content consumption, than content creation. In contrast, the AC100 hardware is definitely suitable for the latter and many potential buyers will find Android as insufficient for their purposes.

I just hope that Nvidia & Toshiba get their act together and quickly release an Ubuntu variant for Tegra2 based systems because I am afraid the OS part of their AC100 offering is much weaker than the hardware. The Android 2.1 can remain the factory default but the easy install option of a solid, full-desktop OS should be provided (Ubuntu/ARM is just that). I would also suggest increasing the amount of RAM and the USB ports in order to make the product directly comparable to Atom netbooks (and not be ashamed after the comparison). With these improvements, Toshiba could create a very strong contender for the business of those who are waiting for a powerful smartbook or tablet and not willing to compromise with Apple's offering.

Are smartbooks and Linux meant for each other?

Smartbooks are an upcoming mobile computing device category built around ARM's Cortex A8 and A9 line of processors. These devices are awaited with great anticipation because they promise a mixture between smartphone features (ultra-portable, 3G connected, always-on) and the functionality of netbooks/laptops (>9" screen, seamless web browsing, laptop-like computing performance...etc) at a price point lower than that of current netbooks (sub-$300). Some smartbooks will arrive in the tablet form factor, some of them will come in the more traditional laptop form factor. All of them are expected to be comparable to netbooks in processing power (see this and this).

It is an intriguing question whether smartbooks will widen Linux adoption and erode the often criticised monopoly of Windows on pc-like computing devices.

Since the desktop line of Windows currently doesn't run on ARM processors, we can exclude XP/Vista/7 from the list of likely contenders as smartbook operating systems. Windows 7 successors are currently not planned to be ported to ARM and even that wouldn't be a complete solution since Windows applications will have to be ported as well (a very wide, close-sourced ecosystem).

Microsoft has Windows CE for ARM processors. Windows CE has already been deployed several smartbook-like devices (e.g. the original Psion Netbook) so it is definitely a contender in this market. However, WinCE 6.5 currently doesn't support multiple or multi-core processors  and more than 512Mb of RAM so advanced ARM SOCs like the Tegra2 would be very much limited by this OS. Solving multi-processor support will require significant investment from Microsoft. Incompatibility with the desktop line of Windows is also a severe limiting factor for WinCE. WinCE devices cannot be sold on the appeal of general Windows-compatibility, the user will not be able to install Windows applications onto the device.

Linux on the other hand has a very good technical background on ARM. It has no limitations for processing cores and operating memory and has targeted distributions for this architecture. Android is an outstanding example but several well-known distributions - like Ubuntu - have ARM ports in addition to their x86 base edition. Also, due to the fact that most of the Linux applications are open-source, they are at least possible to port, so we can expect the full usual complement of desktop Linux applications to show up on an ARM Linux distribution when the need becomes visible for them.

Technical factors aside, there is always the argument for Linux: being free . This may be important with smartbooks due to the very low targeted price point which doesn't tolerate even moderate OS licensing fees (like $50/unit). So unless Microsoft gives Windows CE for practically free, Linux has the advantage here.

Since Windows CE has practically no advantages over Linux on ARM (in fact quite the opposite), Linux has a fairly good chance to be deployed on smartbooks as the primary operating system shipping with the device. Now, we can get into specifics. What kind of Linux and what kind of GUI?

Google's Android is a very special Linux distribution. It's touch-oriented GUI is simple and usable but it doesn't run X-Windows so lacks the usual full-fledged Linux applications (Android applications are specifically written for the Dalvik virtual machine and its APIs in Java.) With this in mind, and considering the current frenzy around Android, I expect it to be deployed heavily on smartbook tablets. This form-factor is ideal for use cases in which full-fledged desktop applications are not necessary (e.g.: a web tablet with media player capabilities). More advanced Linux users will likely be able to install a full desktop Linux onto their tablets but the average consumer will be satisfied with Android.

However, laptop-like smartbooks with keyboards are better served with a full-desktop Linux like Ubuntu due to the fact, that on these devices, buyers will expect full-fledged applications like OpenOffice, Thunderbird, Firefox...etc. Android would be very limiting for the use cases expected from a netbook/smartbook (editing complex text documents, spreadsheets, using a full-fledged browser, email client...etc). I believe, the exact GUI environment is not really important for this kind of smartbooks although some netbook specific desktop environments (like Ubuntu Netbook Remix and Moblin) may be more efficient for smartbook models with low-resolution screens (below 1024x768).

My conclusion is that every kind of smartbook device can be put to its full potential with a properly customized Linux variant. Manufacturers seem to be aware of this since most of the already announced products are known to ship with Android (e.g.: Notion Ink Adam) or hinted to ship with some kind of Linux (e.g.: Lenovo Skylight).

Is the iPad good for Linux?

Regardless of how severe limitations Apple imposes on the iPad, we can expect it to be reasonably successful. I don't think it will duplicate the success of the iPhone but due to Apple's strong marketing and its own technical merits, it will sell in significant numbers.

How will this affect Linux and the upcoming tablets based on it?

When I say Linux, I mean Google's Android and Chrome operating systems as well because they are all based on Linux.

I believe the iPad will have a positive effect on Linux adoption. The bigger its success will be, the bigger help it will provide to Linux. Now, I agree that this sounds controversial first, because the iPad runs Apple's own iPhone OS which is a competitor to Linux but the logic gets more obvious if we think about the biggest hurdle for Linux adoption: compatibility with Windows.

When buying computer-like devices, people still expect compatibility with Windows and windows applications. Microsoft's monopoly of the desktop makes it hard for alternative OS-es to make headway. The iPhone made a dent in this cornerstone because it proved that it can serve as a viable, ultra-mobile internet device, a role played by, overwhelmingly, Windows laptops before. The iPhone created a huge ecosystem of software developers/publishers completely independent from Microsoft and Windows. The iPad will continue this trend and will highlight this market in a much more meaningful manner.

People buying the iPad will be aware that their device will never run Windows programs yet they will buy it anyway. Their example will further destroy the myth that a computer needs Windows to serve useful purposes. The iPad, due to its size, is more of a "computer" in the eyes of the people than an iPhone, regardless of the technical similarities.

After the iPad successfully lowers resistance to non-Windows computing devices, Linux will have a much better chance of competing in the mobile computing market and, eventually, on the desktop.

Apple's iPad vs Notion Ink's Adam tablet with Ubuntu: battle of two worlds

We can safely say that the Apple iPad is received with mixed feelings by the IT-savvy community. The main problem is that the tablet is just not as revolutionary as many expected it would be. It keeps many of the limitations of the iPhone (no multitasking, tightly controlled app-store) and doesn't provide impressive new features which could keep the balance.

Let's compare this tablet to one of the more promising Tegra 2 tablets on the way to the market: the Notion Ink Adam. Admittedly, the Adam is not on the market yet, while the iPad is quite sure gets there soon. Nevertheless, we give the benefit of the doubt to Notion Ink (especially, considering how badly Nvidia wants to start the Tegra 2 device line). In my comparison, the Adam runs Ubuntu Linux with the Mobile Edition which has a touch oriented user interface. The first version of the Adam is expected to come with Android but since Nvidia officially supports Ubuntu on the Tegra 2, we can expect a fully working Ubuntu edition on the Adam soon enough. Moreover, for such powerful hardware as the Adam, even Android seems limited to me.

Screen technology and diplay features


Both the iPad and the Adam have ~10" LCD displays with capacitive touchscreen technology. However, the Adam features PixelQi technology which means lower power consumption, direct sunlight readability and higher contrast when switched to BW mode for reading. The Adam will have a hardware switch for easy mode-changing (BW/low-power colour/full colour) which will help lowering the power consuption (like a wifi or 3G radio shut-off switch). The iPad doesn't seem to have any hw switch, not even one for adjusting the brightness of the screen (meaning: unless there is an ultra-easy touch gesture for it, nobody will adjust the brigthness for ambient light conditions). The iPad specs page lists an ambient light sensor, so the OS may be able to automatically turn-down the backlight when not needed but this won't save you as much as the power saving modes of the PixelQi screen. All-in-all, the screen of the Adam seems to be more versatile and power efficient.

Processing power

The custom Apple A4 processor of the iPad runs at 1Ghz and is a single-core ARM Cortex A9 solution. The Tegra 2 of the Adam features 2 Cortex A9 cores running at 1 Ghz. Due to the exact same technology platform, I expect the Adam almost two times as powerful as the iPad and this should be very much noticable in the more important applications (e.g. web-browser). The iPad has the stock ARM Mali 50 graphics core, while the Tegra 2 includes a Geforce 9 level graphics core. Although, I am not very familiar with the capabilities of these cores, I expect the Nvidia core to be more powerful since this is where Nvidia has strong competency. Some say the Mali core is not even in the same league as the Tegra 2 graphics core but this remains to be seen. (Disclaimer: it is possible that current reports about the inclusion of the Mali are inaccurate and the iPad uses a PowerVR graphics core like the iPhone).

GUI/desktop enviroment

The iPad runs the GUI environment of the iPhone OS (an OS X derivative), while the Adam runs Ubuntu Mobile (at least in my comparison). The Adam may not support multitouch in the short term but already has support for gestures (e.g: a swipe for moving to the next image in the image browser). The iPad supports multitouch and a wide array of gestures. I expect the iPad GUI easier to use and more refined (at least for the time being, since Ubuntu Mobile is quite a young project).

The "desktop" is easy to use in both environment, very similar application startup and indicators. The Ubuntu OS will run several applications in parallel while you will be able to use only one app ata time on the iPad. (see about  this later)

Web Browsing


The iPad doesn't run Flash but said to render normal webpages snappily in its custom Safari browser. Youtube is supported just like on the iPhone but no Flash games and no Java applets in webpages (see about interpreters later in the application section).

The Adam will run full editions of Firefox/Chrome/Opera and expected to have an optimized Flash version (Flash 10.1 coming soon) so it will be good for running web-pages with video streaming and Flash games. Java applets (rare nowadays) will work too.

Playing video / Listening to music

The iPad has no HDMI output (has a simple VGA output, max res: 1024x768) and is rated for decoding 720p videos. This is a far cry from the 3 simultanious 1080p streams of the Tegra 2 and built-in HDMI port of the Adam. The Tegra 2/ Adam offering is far more powerful and makes the Adam a viable HTPC if you want to play the movies from your tablet onto your HDTV screen.

Both have a 3.5 mm jack and speakers so hw-wise, listening to music should not be a problem. Ubuntu has powerful music player applications which are on par with iTunes of the iPhone/iPad.

Playing games

The Geforce graphics core of the Tegra 2 in the Adam will be quite sufficient to play 3D games. The performance of the Mali 50 is not widely known at this point but is not expected to be worse than the graphics core in the iPhone 3GS so it is likely able to run 3G games like the demo based on the Unreal engine. I expect the Tegra 2 graphics core of the Adam  more powerful.

Camera / video chat / VOIP


The iPad doesn't have a built-in camera which is a glaring omission. The Adam will have a 3Mp built-in camera, which is more than enough for Skype videophoning. Moreover, the Tegra 2 supports real-time hardware encoding of 1080p streams to H264 so, properly written video-chat applications should work extremely well on the Adam. Ubuntu should run any Linux VOIP app compiled for ARM. I expect Skype and other open/closed source software work well on the Adam in the short-medium term.

Apple has recently lifted the restrictions on Skype and other VOIP apps in the iPhone app catalog so the iPad will have the voice part OK but you will need an external cam for video chats and currently there is no information on the video encoding capabilities of Apple's A4 SOC.

Battery runtime

The iPad is rated for 10hrs of use (wifi browsing). The Adam is specified to have 16 hours of wifi browsing. The Adam looks like the winner here but the iPad's 10-hour runtime is also quite good.

Ebook reading

The Adam's PixelQi screen supports this activity much better especially in sunlit places. Ubuntu runs FBReader (my favourite ebook reader software) and has viewers for every kind of complex-document formats (most of them will be displayed in Evince, in case of Ubuntu). The iPad has a new reader application which is too early to write about but expected to be an intuitive reader-app (if the track record of Apple is any indication).

Navigation

Both devices include GPS units, so navigation software should be available for both. Google Navigation will certainly run on the Adam, I just hope it doesn't get blocked from the iPad app-store.

Other applications, Multitasking


While the iPhone has a huge selection of applications in Apple's app-store, most of them will have to be tailored for the iPad for full potential. This will surely happen if the iPad becomes successful but it may happen slowly if the device proves to be less than a clear success. Application-wise, I expect the Apple iPad to be as closed as the iPhone, so you will be able to install only Apple-approved applications from the official app-store.

Ubuntu on the Adam can run any full-desktop or command line Linux/ARM software from the Ubuntu ARM repositories. This is a huge selection of software and includes powerful applications like OpenOffice, GIMP and others. These may not be optimized for the touchscreen interface but the Adam's backside trackpad can help using them in tablet mode and in docked mode you will be able to use a USB mouse and keyboard just like with a netbook. Moreover, Ubuntu is completely free of limitations so you will be able install whatever software you want.

The iPad currently has multitasking disabled so you can run only one application at a time. The Adam has the full multitasking of Linux. The Adam's dual-core hardware should run several applications efficiently in parallel. A good use-case for this: a Bittorrent download running on your Adam while reading an ebook (I do this quite often on my OLPC XO-1).

Apple doesn't allow applications running in interpreters so you will never run a Flash/Java/Python/.Net-Mono application on the iPad although the hardware is sufficient for them. The Adam's Ubuntu will run any of those applications without any restrictions. Flash 10.1 is expected to be optimized for ARM SOCs and Java 6 has an optimized version for the Cortex A9 processors so the Adam should run apps based on these technologies well. Desktop and Webstarted Java clients are quite common in the enterprise IT world so the Adam may get some love from there.

It is not yet known how much RAM the iPad or the Adam has, but based on the Tegra 2 development board, the Adam will have at least 1 Gb of RAM which is quite sufficient for running even several complex applications in parallel.

Storage

The Adam will have expandable storage by a microSD slot, while the iPad seems to have no storage expansion slot at all.

Price

The cheapest version of the iPad is announced for $499 in the US. The Adam is expected to carry a sub-$400 pricetag ($320 is a current estimate).

Conclusion

The iPad hardware seems to be seriously lacking when compared to the Adam's Tegra 2 foundations, PixelQi screen, trackpad and other features.

Application-wise, the playground is more leveled but for Linux-savvy people the choice is a no-brainer. The iPad will certainly appeal to people who want devices which "just work" and accept the serious, artificial limitations imposed on their device.

Reference:

iPad specifications  by Apple

Ubuntu Mobile Edition

Tegra 2 supports Ubuntu Linux

According to this faq-like post on the official Nvidia Tegra developer site, Ubuntu Linux is supported as an operating system for Tegra 2 based devices.

This is extremely important for both Nvidia and Linux in general since a lot of IT-savvy people find Android insufficient for the netbook form factor and ask for a "real" Linux on these very promising devices.

I tend to agree with this view primarily because Tegra 2 @1Ghz is a powerful SOC for a smartbook/netbook/tablet which can run a full desktop Linux with decent speed. I see no reason to limit Tegra 2 based systems to inferior operating systems like Android or Windows CE (bah). As an example, Windows CE 6.0 supports only 512Mb RAM and only one processor. Since the Tegra 2 has two Cortex A9 cores,Windows CE will not be able to utilize both. Android has no X-Windows on it so it cannot run normal Linux software, only software directly written for Android. In contrast, Ubuntu for ARM supports multiple processors, any reasonable amount of RAM and most of the popular Linux software can be installed readily  from the Ubuntu ARM repositories, and even the more obscure sw likely requires only a recompile.

A simple Gnome desktop or Ubuntu's Netbook Remix user interface may not be perfect for a touchscreen operated tablet but is very useable with the traditional laptop form factor. Some of the Tegra 2 tablets will add a pointer device as well, in addition to the touchscreen (like the Notion Ink Adam) so these machines will be easy to use with a customized, full Linux desktop.

Perspective:

The list of currently known Tegra 2 tablets/smartbooks.

Some performance comparisons between Cortex A9 (like the Tegra2) and Intel's Atom:

• Cortex A9 dual-core vs Atom demo side-by-side


• ARM Cortex A9 vs Intel Atom N450 Pine Trail

Cortex A9 dual-core vs Atom demo side-by-side

Earlier, I wrote about the relative performance of Intel's Atom and the upcoming smartbook processors based on ARM's Cortex A9  here.

Continuing this line, I have found a demonstration video which shows a 1.6 Ghz Atom (likely the 270) and a 500Mhz Cortex A9 development board side by side. Both of the machines run at the same screen resolution, same memory and same operating system (looks like a stock Ubuntu with Gnome).

The video demonstrates web browsing performance with typical websites. The Cortex A9 board seems a little bit slower but not significantly, and at still a perfectly acceptable speed.

Now, the most astounding part is, that the A9 board runs only at 500 Mhz which means that its performance is throttled back for ultra-low power consumption. Cortex A8 level SOCs - the current generation - are known to run at 1 Ghz (Snapdragon, OMAP3, Armada) and the Cortex A9 Sparrow demo chip runs at 2Ghz (produced on the 28nm GlobalFoundries process).

This means that a completely doable Cortex A9 at 1.5 Ghz would have about 3 times the performance of the demo 500Mhz development board and still consume much-much less than the Atom. It would definitely leave the Atom 270 and N450 in the dust.

Moreover, the development board had no graphics accelerator at all, while finalized OEM SOCs will definitely have GPUs built-in (for example the Tegra 2 will include a Geforce GPU coupled with the two A9 cores).

The Cortex A9 at 500 Mhz is an ultra-low-power configuration and it is safe to say that it would take 1/10 - 1/5 of the consumption of the Atom which means much-much better battery runtimes.

In theory, the 1.6 Ghz Atom puts out ~4000 DMIPS and the dual-core, 500 Mhz A9 puts out only 2500 DMIPS raw power. This means that the A9 also has an architectural advantage somewhere. This may be the two real cores of the A9 versus the one-core-with-hyperthreading of the Atom. Since web browsers are by nature heavily multithreaded, the dual-A9 may support this type of application much better.

I can't wait to see some prototype A9 devices displayed at CES.

Freescale 7" smartbook tablet design under $200

[caption id="attachment_51" align="alignnone" width="412" caption="freescale-tablet"][/caption]

Freescale has come up with a tablet reference design which they expect to be selling for under $200. It is not entirely clear whether they meant end-user prices or OEM production prices but $200 for a production price would be way too much for a Cortex-A8 category tablet, so I assume they meant end-user prices.

What is interesting about this design, that they have created a special, simplified user interface, which may be appealing for the target audience.

The operating system is a Debian derivative.

This machine would be ideal as an ultra mobile browsing/emailing, video/music playing device at home or when traveling.

The 7" screen may be too small for some but it definitely makes the machine more portable.

Via Endgadget

More information here.

ARM Cortex A9 vs Intel Atom N450 Pine Trail

While I am eagerly waiting for the smartbook product introductions at 2010 CES, I am wondering what kind of performance we can expect from those upcoming ARM based tablets and netbooks. Although some of the smartbooks will be based on Cortex A8 technology, I believe only the more performant, dual-core Cortex A9 system-on-chip (SOC) designs will be really successful (see this about the A8).

Since newer Pine Trail Atom netbooks are already getting fairly good battery runtimes, the question is unavoidable for the smartbooks: will we get at least similar performance to the Atom based netbooks? New Intel based netbooks will mostly use the netbook-oriented Atom N450 chip (Pine View), so I will try to draw a comparison between this chip and the known characteristics of A9 SOCs.

Since it is extremely hard to come by good comparative data between ARM and Atom, partly because Cortex A9 based systems are not yet available for the public, this post is highly speculative and by no means should serve as the basis for purchasing your next smartbook/netbook.

By ARM's specifications, the Cortex A9 core has an approximate raw performance of 2.5 DMIPS/MHz. It can run at 2Ghz when produced on the 28nm GlobalFoundries process. This is 5000 DMIPS/core with an expected 10000 DMIPS for a dual core setup (MP CORE version).

Since it is more likely that the first A9 SOCs will be manufactured with a 40nm process, we only calculate with a 1.5 Ghz top frequency which would yield about 7500 DMIPS.

Now, performance wise. the new N450 is only marginally better that the earlier Atom chips (5-10%, see this Anandtech article) and several discussions report that the older Atoms get 2.5 DMIPS/Mhz, a 1.6 Ghz Atom yields about  4000 DMIPS (one of the discussions). Pine View Atoms for netbooks (N450 descendants) are not planned to be made dual-core in the near future so we calculate with only one core.

I am aware that this is not a perfect comparison since DMIPS values between different architectures are not 100% comparable, but these results would mean an 80% advantage in raw power for the dual-A9.

Some more considerations:

All recent ARM chips include hardware decoders for H264 video while the N450/NM10 has no such capability. This means either choppy HD video from Youtube or an external H264 decoder chip (like the Broadcomm one or an Nvidia Ion like extension). Certain Cortex A9 SOCs promise multiple 1080p stream decoding in parallel (like the Tegra 2) without loading the general purpose ARM core. Moreover, in the case of the N450, the maximum output on hdmi is restricted to 1366x768 (1440x1050 for the analog vga out). So you can forget about viewing HD videos with your Atom netbook even if you have an external, HD monitor or TV.

Flash hardware acceleration is coming (with Flash 10.1)  to all ARM machines with H264 decoders but in case of the N450 alone, there is nothing to accelerate with. So you better check whether your Atom netbook has the external video decoder or you will never watch streamed hd videos with decent speed. It is fully possible that Nvidia won't produce a new ION chipset for the new Atoms since Intel denied access to the relevant hw interfaces. Instead, Nvidia will work even harder on Tegra 2.

Architecture wise: the new Pine View Atom remains in-order architecture, produced on 45nm while the Cortex A9 is out-of-order core (more modern, inherently more powerful than the Atom) with easy implementation on the TSMC 40nm process and the GlobalFoundries 28nm process.

The n450 SOC and the NM10 companion chip(set) still works in a 6.5w TDP while the dual-A9 SOCs are expected to work in a 2W TDP. This is massive difference and makes it likely that the same battery will last much longer with an A9 smartbook than with an N450 netbook. The N450 doesn't need active cooling anymore (this is good news) so the new machines will not have fans but the TDP values above indicate that Atom netbooks will likely be hotter than A9 based smartbooks especially in continued use.

The third generation Atoms - which could improve the situation - will come only in 2012, seriously late compared to A9 based chips (1Q 2010).

Conclusion:

It very much seems that dual core Cortex A9 SOCs will be at-least on-par with the Pine View N450 Atom, performance wise, and possibly overpower them by 50-80% in raw processing power. Graphics performance, end-user price and battery runtimes are also expected to be much better for the A9 based machines.

Unless, Intel comes out with much more powerful Atom designs for netbooks, ARM Cortex A9 based smartbook products may severely cut into Atom netbook sales. X86 compatibility is less of a factor in this segment, so consumers may decide based on perceived performance, battery runtime in which A9 smartbooks seem to have the advantage.

Does OLPC have a future in the smartbook era?

OLPC is widely known as the organization which - indirectly - started the netbook revolution by pioneering affordable, mobile computing devices. The second iteration of their low-cost educational laptop, the XO-1.5,  is about to be released. "Released" in a sense, that it will become available to large scale educational projects but not to individuals or smaller, grass-roots projects. The current lean production cost of the XO-1 is at around $180, the XO-1.5 may go below that if a sufficient volume is achieved. The XO-1.5 is expected to provide full internet browsing with Flash support, ebook reading and the more traditional learning functions of the Sugar Learning Platform. The XO-1.5 will provide a Gnome or XFCE based Linux desktop in addition to Sugar. One of the goals of OLPC to make the XO be able to provide day-long battery life for students (although the current version of the hardware only provides ~3.5-4.5hrs of use with web browsing on wifi.

Smartbooks is an upcoming, low-cost consumer device category. These machines are expected to cost significantly less than current netbooks (sub $200-250 end-user price) while supporting the same functions (full web browsing, ebook reading, playing video/audio). Smartbooks will likely come with Android, full-desktop running Linux operating systems or Windows CE. Since these computers are based on ultra power-efficient ARM system-on-chip designs, they are likely to provide at least day-long battery runtimes (12-16 hrs with browsing on wifi is promised by several vendors).

As can be seen, capabilities and cost-wise, smartbooks coming in 2010 get very close to the upcoming OLPC XO-1.5. Some of the smartbook versions (based on Tegra 2 or other Cortex A9) will way outperform the XO-1.5 in processing power and battery runtime.

Naturally, the comparisson is more complex than this, since the XO has some special features, which are not planned for every currently known smartbook designs. The most notable are:

• Daylight-capable PixelQi screen for working/reading in direct sunlight. Some of the smartbooks will likely also come with PixelQi screens.


• Rugged industrial design with rubberized keyboard. There is no currently known smartbook product which puts special emphasis on usage in harsh environment but all ARM designs are fanless and it is likely that a lot of smartbooks will come with smaller capacity SSD drives so smartbooks will be likely less prone to typical laptop failures that the average netbook.


• Special educational software (Sugar). The Sugar Learning Platform is now available for a set of "normal" Linux distributions as an alternative desktop environment, next to Gnome and KDE, so with minimal effort, Sugar and activities can be made usable on smartbooks as well.

Again, it seems that a smartbook derivative should be able to play the role of an XO in an educational environment.

Two of the huge advantages of smartbooks is availability and economies of scale.They are planned to be available from a host of sales channels, most notably from 3G service operators at subsidized prices. This means, that some of the smartbooks will likely come at zero initial price, only a 2 year data contract will need to be signed. At the targeted end-user prices (sub $250) smartbooks will be immensely popular as secondary home computers and mobile companions (just like netbooks but even more) which means that economies of scale will be reached quickly and prices will go further down.

In contrast, OLPC products are not available for individuals or small projects and currently there are no major project sales at OLPC. This means that there is no easy way to reach economies of scale (unless, suddenly a lot of countries start ordering XOs, which is unlikely). G1G1 programs will not work again, the first was a success, the last one was a complete failure. (G1G1= give 1, get 1 = donate 400$, you get 1 machine for yourself and 1 other machine is sent to the developing world as your donation).

All of these factors point into one diection: If OLPC wants to stay as a relevant IT/educational effort, it should realign its hardware and "business" strategy taking advantage of  the upcoming smartbook revolution.

To a certain extent, this seems to be happening. OLPC is planning to switch to ARM by 2011 with their XO-1.75 product and continue this line with the XO-3 in 2012. There is not much information about the XO-1.75 but it seems that it will be based on a Marvell ARM chip. Since Marvell hasn't announced plans for Cortex A9 based products, we can assume, that OLPC will use one of the smartbook-oriented Armada (a Cortex A8 SOC).

Software-wise, OLPC has already improved its position by providing Gnome and Sugar as equal desktop alternatives on top of the default Linux OS shipping with the XO-1.5. This way, the XO can be a much more versatile tool when needed. Even Microsoft's Windows XP is expected to run well on this machine, which may be appealing to some of their prospective customers.

These steps are certainly necessary but I would suggest a much more aggressive startegy:

• Stopping as much in-house hardware development as possible. Partnering with a smartbook producer, taking a polished, tested ARM Cortex A9 board design without any further customization. I would skip the Cortex A8 processors in order to ensure better performance than the VIA C7-M in the XO-1.5.


• The industrial design may be kept at OLPC but I suggest scrapping those extreme designs which has been recently circulated for the XO-3. Use a simple, 10" touch tablet form factor or the current laptop design with a 10" PixelQi screen.


• Using a Linux distro already customized for the said board and add Sugar only as an alternative to the default desktop environment.


• Sell the XOs to everyone in the developed world, ensure the widest possible availability. A $50 donation markup over the costs is reasonable but G1G1 style sales attempts should be strictly avoided. If sufficient sales can be generated, that will make sure that the project stays known to everyone.

This way, a lot of development costs could be spared and OLPC could come up with an ARM based XO product in 2010, long ahead of schedule. A move like this would revitalize the community around OLPC and put the organisation firmly back to the map of relevance.

Desktop Java applications on smartbooks: what to expect?

Smartbooks are an upcoming line of affordable, mobile computing devices. Their use case scenarios fit in well with currently popular Java desktop applications (e.g.: Azureus/Vuze bittorrent client, RSSOwl feed aggregator...etc) and there are still a lot of websites using Java applets or webstartable Java applications for auxiliary functions (like mass upload of files). Moreover, many company intranets contain desktop Java based technologies (e.g. fast data entry forms, GIS mapping clients...etc). Due to this, affordable, Java capable devices may spur wider adoption of mobile computing within companies. Finally, the new JavaFX rich internet application framework (an Adobe Flash competitor) seems to be heavily supported by Oracle, so we can expect advancements on JavaFX deployments on public and intranet websites. JavaFX has similar Java requirements as Java applets.

For these reasons, it is interesting how smartbooks can be expected to work with desktop Java software.

Since the upcoming smartbooks are mostly based on ARM, we need to analyse how Java is supported on the latest ARM system-on-chip (SOC) processors.

Originally, ARM created dedicated Java support in their processors through its Jazelle technology. This provided hardware acceleration in a CLDC profile environment (Java edition for smartphones and other embedded applications). Jazelle provides better startup times until the Hotspot compiler can compile Java bytecode to native ARM code. If the device is memory constrained, it is possible to use Jazelle alone, without the Hotspot compiler. Some details about this can be found here.

In a smartbook environment CLDC is not enough, the full Java Standard Edition is expected in order to make the computer be able to run complex desktop programs like Azureus.

A number of upcoming smartbooks are based on the Qualcomm Snapdragon platform (which is roughly an ARM Cortex A8 level processor). A recent development (June 2009) that Java standard edition has been ported and optimized for the Snapdragon platform (details here). It is unknown if the Snapdragon uses Jazelle and the optimizations include Jazelle but it is likely since other Qualcomm ARM processors include this technology. This is encouraging from the Java perspective (the article mentions 32x improvement in application performance) but the Snapdragon and Cortex A8 processors may be generally not fast enough for complex applications.

The more powerful smartbooks will be based on dual core Cortex A9 processors (like the nVidia Tegra 2). These are generally assumed to be comparable to latest Atoms in performance. For this processor type, Sun has recently demonstrated their optimized Java 6 Standard Edition environment (2009 Oct, details are here). Cortex A9 processors include Jazelle by default and it is likely that SOC manufacturers will also include them in their end products.

Conclusion: With proper customizations by the device manufacturer, Java applications may perform better on Cortex A8/A9 based ARM systems than on comparable Atom chips because of the inherent Jazelle hardware support and the ARM specific optimizations done by Sun. The safe bet - from the Java perspective - would be on dual core Cortex A9 based systems since these will certainly have the necessary processing power for desktop applications.

The success of smartbooks remains to be seen but it is safe to say that Java will have good support on these systems and customers of such machines may expect reasonable performance from their Java applications.

Cortex A8: insufficient processing power?

Today, I watched a video about a prototype Wistron smartbook called the Pbook (see the video here) which is a Snapdragon based machine. The Snapdragon is roughly comparable to ARM Cortex A8 based SOCs like the Marwell Armada and the TI OMAP3.

The machine was running a Linux variant with a lightweight desktop environment (I believe it was XFCE).

The boot process seemed quite slow and the machine very unresponsive in general.

If the video represents the processing power of the Snapdragon realistically, I have to say, it will not be sufficient to run "real" desktop environments on Linux. This is a problem, because people will expect laptop-like behaviour from laptop-looking devices.

These machines may run Android snappily but Android is currently optimized for smartphones and thus may not fulfill user expectations. (It would certainly not fulfill mine)

It is possible, that when it comes to ARM system-on-chips, only the dual-core Cortex A9 based SOCs will be suitable for being used in smartbooks/netbooks (like the Tegra 2). However, it seems that a lot of producers have already chosen A8 based SOCs (for example the Lenovo smartbook for AT&T with Snapdragon).

Potentially, even A8 based systems can be fast enough if an optimized Linux edition is shipped with them but producers should be very careful to ship systems powerful enough to make their users reasonably satisfied with their responsiveness.

[Update: 2010-JAN-01]

After watching this video, the picture has become a bit clearer. The video is about the commercially available (only in Japan) Sharp Netwalker PC-Z1 which uses a Cortex A8 based processor and runs a full Gnome desktop with Firefox and Abiword. Boot time is not very fast (~90secs) but since you can suspend-resume this machine, it is not very important. Firefox cold  starts (first start) in about 10 seconds and warm starts (second start) in about 5 seconds. This is not very snappy but acceptable. OpenOffice Spreadsheet cold starts in about 50 secs which is rather on the unacceptable side. The Netwalker sports only 512Mb of RAM which is at the minimum for the Gnome desktop. Warm applications starts could be helped with more memory. Cold starts could be helped with more memory and some configurable pre-fetching. This is mostly in-line with my earlier assumptions.

Promising smartbooks with Nvidia Tegra2

Quite strangely, I find myself waiting for CES 2010. Not that I am a big fan of electronics shows (or planning to attend) but this CES is special since several notable companies seem to be making important product announcements at it.

One of these companies is Nvidia which is announcing the second generation of its Tegra system-on-chip (SOC) processors. Moreover, it very much seems that the product announcement will be coupled with actual end-product announcements from a set of companies.

Why is Tegra 2 so interesting?

It is interesting because it will help creating a new product category, most often referred as smartbooks. These are practically netbooks with very good battery life, integrated 3G connectivity and a very appealing price tag (sub $250). Tegra 2 processors are based on ARM's Cortex A9 core design and are coupled with nVidia's own graphics technology.

According to nVidia, smartbooks based on Tegra 2 should be able to play 3 Full HD (1080p) video streams in parallel, without major framedrops. This means that the machine can play a 1080p video and run some power-hungry application (e.g. a Bittorrent download) in parallel. I assume that performance wise, the dual Cortex A9 core of the Tegra 2 coupled with 1 Gb of RAM will be enough to run average netbook software snappily (OpenOffice, Skype, Firefox, chat-client). All of this without a noisy fan (ARM based systems usually don't need active cooling) and with 8-16 hours of battery runtime.

For me, such a machine would constitute the ideal web-browser + video player + ebook-reader + bittorrent home computer. Ideally in the tablet factor. My current favourite is the Notion Ink tablet (although this company seems to have the least chance to actually deliver.)

Generally, the Tegra 2 will spur some competition in the Atom dominated netbook space. Originally, netbooks were promised as the affordable computing for everyone (started by OLPC).  Unfortunately, netbooks are still not really affordable. Their price isn't going down but rather stagnate or rise slightly. This means that there is no competition, which is likely due to Intel's domination of the market segment (by its Atom processors).

Tegra 2 and the other new ARM based solutions (Snapdragon, Armada, OMAP) may be the long awaited competitors which result in really affordable computers for the general public.