Microsoft pushing for 16-core Atom CPUs: something to do with Linux?

According to this article, Microsoft is pestering Intel to produce low-power Atom-based, x86 processors for server machines.

I am wondering why they would force this direction. Do they know server requirements better than Intel? Why do they think that low-power x86 server chips are so important?

I believe the answer comes from the following factors:

• Power efficiency is becoming more and more important in the server room. Intel processors (Microsoft's home turf) have less than stellar watt/performance efficiency but they are the best in raw performance / cores.


• ARM provides the best watt/performance in general computing (far far better than Intel x86) and ARM is seemingly scalable to the server performance range (with multiple cores and coming to 28nm high-performance production processes)


• Microsoft doesn't have a server operating system presence on the ARM architecture. Linux on the other hand runs on ARM, has optimized distributions for ARM SOCs.


• ARM licensees are actively pursuing server chips (Nvidia, Nufront...etc)

If 4-16 core ARM server processors appear in the near future, servers built with them would have superior watt/performance ratios so they may quickly gain acceptance.

These systems would be perfectly served by Linux distributions (Red Hat, Ubuntu, Suse) and Microsoft could not offer anything for them. Linux is already the strongest player in the datacenter and this would grow its market share considerably while reducing the market-share of Windows simultaniously.

Even if Microsoft manages to create a stable Win8 server OS solution with all the required additional Windows sw (database systems, application servers…etc) on ARM in 2-3 years, it will be pretty much too late. They will need to play catch-up with Linux. The Microsoft Win8 solution will have to sell for peanuts to be in the game which would make it very much unprofitable in the short-medium run. Moreover, as x86 server market share goes down, their x86 Windows Server OS profits also go down.

All in all: If ARM processors appear in the market in the near future, Microsoft may face a steep uphill battle in the datacenter. If x86 based Atom server can slow down the onslaught of ARM servers, Microsoft may gain enough time to come up with a Win8/ARM server solution and avoid serious loss of server market-share.

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.

The biggest mistake Palm has made with WebOS

Palm's WebOS (a Linux variant) based phones have been out for a while but I haven't had the need to consider them until recently (in the form of my Treo 650 broken down).

My Treo 650 was a real workhorse, containing hundreds of contacts, thousands of calendar entries (I use the calendar actively and like to keep entries for a very long time for reference), lots of todos and memos. As a long time Linux/Ubuntu user, I have synchronized and backed up my Treo with JPilot, which is an excellent Linux application. In the past, I have used several Palm devices and I was always able to migrate my complete PIM database with ease between the old device and the new one.

Now that my Treo seems to be dead, I was considering buying a Palm Pre. Researching the Pre, I soon learned that the old synchronization protocol (Hotsync) doesn't work at all with the Pre and there seems to be no way to correctly synchronize the Pre with my Linux desktop. Since I store relatively sensitive information on the Treo, I would never synchronize my PIM database with a cloud service like Google. Thus, Palm's new Synergy sync methods are practically useless for me.

This problem is not only related to the Linux desktop, Windows users are affected as well but they at least have existing third-party options for synchronizing the Pre with Outlook.

Now, this is a real show-stopper for me and lowers the Pre from a trusted Palm device to the level of the average smartphone in my eyes. Palm seems to have lost an avid user since if my workflow is broken anyway, I might as well switch to Android. Android has a much bigger community than WebOS, so there is a bigger chance that I find a well working syncing solution to the Linux desktop.

It is also ironic that although Palm's new WebOS is a Linux device, Palm has decided to break compatibility with the Linux desktop since the only working way between them was HotSync.

It should have been of paramount importance for Palm to ensure compatibility with its own Palm Desktop software and all of the other desktop software which was communicating with Palm devices over HotSync. Currently, Treo owners don't have an easy way to upgrade to the Pre/Pixi since their PIM databases cannot be easily migrated to the new device the way they are used to. As a fair chunk of Treo users were business people, I am sure, most of them are NOT comfortable with their PIM database stored in the cloud. Palm should understand that cloud storage with Synergy - while a good thing - is NOT a replacement for HotSync in a lot of user scenarios.

I believe that Palm's lower-than-expected sales of the Pre and the Pixi can be amounted to this, incompatibility with the old ways and the well-working syncing solutions and desktop tools. Their established Treo/PDA customer base will simply switch to other phones and leave them. This way they loose all of their inherited advantage with this people.

If they want to save the customer base which is still on PalmOS, they should VERY QUICKLY create the HotSync client for WebOS or create a HotSync Synergy plugin and restore compatibility with the Palm Desktop and all of the other desktop software which are still using Hotsync.

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