Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H)
The H takes a look
at the XO 1.5 laptop from the One Laptop Per Child project. "The
current OLPC, the XO-1, uses an x86 Geode chip from Advanced Micro Devices
(AMD). The XO-1.5 is based on the design of the XO-1, but will use a new
VIA C7-M processor with clock ranges from 400MHz to 1GHz. The OLPC Tech
Team's goal with the re-design is to match the XO-1 power consumption. The
refreshed model will use the new VIA VX855 chipset that includes the memory
interface, 3D graphics engine, USB, SDIO and video decoder on a single
chip. The memory in the XO-1.5 has been increased to 1 GB of RAM and 4GB of
flash storage, with an option for 8 GB."
(Log in to post comments)
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 4:54 UTC (Tue) by Janne (guest, #40891) [Link]
Wouldn't Intel Atom make much more sense? It offers comparable performance to Via, while running cooler. It also has superior chipsets available to it. Or is the choice to go with Via due to price?
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 7:42 UTC (Tue) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159) [Link]
The low power graphics chipset usually paired with Atom is not particularly free software friendly at the moment. That said, the decision was almost definitely made based on a combination of price and features/performance.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 7:53 UTC (Tue) by laf0rge (subscriber, #6469) [Link]
<disclaimer>I work for VIA, though I was not directly involved in anything related to the OLPC so far. Below is just my personal opinion:</disclaimer>
I would say that the problem with the integrated low-power graphics is that AFAIR in the Intel case, they have licensed some PowerVR core and thus don't really have a lot of control/choice about the availability of documentation and/or FOSS drivers. VIA on the other hand has their own graphics core, so they don't depend on any external party and can make their own decisions on what to open up (or not to).
Also, just by the mere fact that VIA is a relatively [to Intel] small company in Taiwan, I would suppose that the price point could be considerably lower - and especially for something like OLPC the price is
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 8:45 UTC (Tue) by jordanb (subscriber, #45668) [Link]
I hate to be a usage nazi, but you mean "price," not "price point." That's one thing that's even more annoying to me than people saying "begs the question" to mean "raises the question."
The price is the cost of something to someone. A price point is a feature of a supply/demand curve.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 1:53 UTC (Wed) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
"""
than people saying "begs the question" to mean "raises the question. """
Dictionaries are beginning to list both usages as acceptable. Which puts the word "beg" in the interesting position of being its own antonym. Personally, I'm a big believer in "descriptive, not prescriptive" and would like to see the old meaning of "ignores the question" dropped. Almost nobody still uses it that way, and having two directly opposing meanings for the word is suboptimal. Languages evolve. Which is tough on the more pedantic folks among us.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 18:46 UTC (Wed) by loevborg (subscriber, #51779) [Link]
The expression "begging the question," or petitio principii, has a very
specific meaning that is not at all properly glossed as "ignoring the question". See the Wikipedia article on the actual meaning:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petitio_principii
This term is useful, not just in academic philosophy, but in common
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 20:54 UTC (Wed) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]
"""
This term is useful, not just in academic philosophy, but in common thinking about explanations and definitions as well. It would be a shame to drop it, or to accept a different, unrelated meaning just because it sounds similar to "raising the question@. """
If it has become a confusing phrase (and it has), that undermines its usefulness. We *are* talking about communication here, right?
My personal solution is simply not to use the phrase, since it is ambiguous and unclear.
Just for reference, in case anyone thinks that only obscure dictionaries have picked up the new common meaning of the phrase, here is what Merriam-Webster has to say:
"""
2: to elicit a question logically as a reaction or response <the quarterback's injury begs the question of who will start in his place>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/beg%20the%20que...
My bet is that new accepted meanings for "loose" and "loosing" are not far away.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 22:50 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
This horse has long since bolted. Once an "incorrect" use enters popular media, it becomes the correct usage by definition. Language is fluid like that.
I've always thought "begs the question" was an awful name anyway. If the critical thinkers want a unique name, it would probably be easier for them to start using "contains the question" or something even less ambiguous.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted May 1, 2009 12:13 UTC (Fri) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]
Personally, having only just discovered that there is a Latin term for the
logical fallacy, I'll be accusing people of "committing petitio principii" in future.
(And not just because it makes me look educated. Oh no sir, not at all...)
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 22:47 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
This isn't even the first word that's its own antonym: the category is
common enough that it has a name of its own (autantonym) and even a Wikipedia page. 'Overlook' is a particularly good one.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 23, 2009 0:37 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
The list is fascinating. I'm surprised at how many of these words I've used without even noticing that anything was irregular.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_self-contradicting_w...
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 24, 2009 9:59 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
That's because the antonymic meanings are almost certainly stored
separately (like most/all meanings of polysemic words) and are disambiguated so well that you only hit an ambiguity when one was intentionally inserted (usually as a pun).
The human brain is *good* at this stuff, which is why 'to beg the
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 23, 2009 5:33 UTC (Thu) by jordanb (subscriber, #45668) [Link]
To add to what's already been said. "Prescription versus description" isn't the dichotomy it's made out to be on the internet. Certianly lexographers who are being prescriptive are not doing their jobs, and Samuel Johnson's putting words in his dictionary that "aught" to be in English was the summit of pretension.
But there are roles for prescription as well, like grammar school teachers and copy editors.
And yes, language does evolve. But when the terms for important technical concepts like begging the question are appropriated to say banal things, that is both a demonstration of the general public's ignorance of the more consequential meaning of the term, and a hindrance to their understanding of it. Language both reflects and shapes the way we think.
[OT] Prescription versus description Posted Apr 23, 2009 22:04 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] Oh, but it is a huge dichotomy, at least in Hispanic countries. We have the bad habit of making authorities compose "prescriptive" grammars all the time instead of just describing the way people talk. I suspect it happens in most of continental Europe, as having National Language Academies where such authorities thrive is a common plague. Accordingly, you are discarding most of European language experts (and I'm not saying that you are wrong there).In the English world the controversy also exists offline, at least according to a delightful little book I read by David Crystal (I think it was "Who cares about English usage"). Maybe not by professional grammarians though, which would explain why English language scholars have risen to the top of their profession so quickly.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 11:04 UTC (Tue) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402) [Link]
You seem to have forgotten the political situation between OLPC and Intel. Right now I don't think OLPC would use an Intel chip if it were the last on the planet. And I don't really blame them.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 6:37 UTC (Tue) by viiru (subscriber, #53129) [Link]
The situation with free drivers for these VIA chipsets tends to be pretty bad. Hopefully the OLPC team is prepared to work with the Openchrome people to get a graphics driver for this thing...
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 10:31 UTC (Tue) by endecotp (guest, #36428) [Link]
> The situation with free drivers for these VIA chipsets tends to be
> pretty bad
I'm not sure why you say that. There was a well-publicised release of chipset documentation from VIA a while ago, and the graphics driver for X and framebuffer (incl. DirectFB) have been good enough for me for many years. What's missing, IIRC, is 3D.
I was surprised when I bought my Atom-based Eee 901 to discover that unlike my VIA systems it does not have fully-functional console framebuffer support, despite Intel's supposed open-source friendliness.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 21, 2009 16:56 UTC (Tue) by etrusco (subscriber, #4227) [Link]
And what's the use of a "3D graphics engine" (in the PR) without 3D support in the driver?
I've been less than excited by the features and stability of the drivers for the chrome9 chipset, in both Linux and Windows. Ok, the opensource X driver (openchrome) is working now, at last, but there's no multi-monitor or video acceleration support. The framebuffer is working now too, but it doesn't support widescreen resolutions and fails/needs work-arounds if the "video memory" is bigger than 64MB.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 1:10 UTC (Wed) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159) [Link]
The driver could contain enough smarts to program the 3D hardware to accelerate certain 2D operations (scaling and colour space conversion for video, compositing for render, etc) without including a fully functional OpenGL driver.
And it is possible to update the software on an XO, so it is entirely possible for future OS images to unlock more capabilities in the hardware.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 11:08 UTC (Wed) by endecotp (guest, #36428) [Link]
> The driver could contain enough smarts to program the 3D hardware
> to accelerate certain 2D operations (scaling
The DirectFB VIA driver has this.
OLPC XO 1.5 Laptop gets a new VIA processor (The H) Posted Apr 22, 2009 11:06 UTC (Wed) by endecotp (guest, #36428) [Link]
> The framebuffer is working now too, but it doesn't support widescreen
> resolutions
I have one system that is using DirectFB with a kernel framebuffer driver written by someone called Dave Boucher; it works well and certainly does widescreen, but the author seems to have disappeared. That's from a couple of years ago and pre-dates VIA's much-publicised source code releases; I would hope that their driver is at least as functional but I haven't checked.
It's certainly easier than getting native widescreen resolution, with 2D acceleration, on an Atom system like the Eee.
|
|
||||||||||||