Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software Hardware

World's First Linux Computer In A CF Card 113

Posted by timothy from the please-don't-format-in-your-camera dept.
An anonymous reader writes "LinuxDevices reports on the world's first Linux computer to fit inside a CompactFlash card. The 'Compact Flash Computer' (CFC) can be mixed and matched with third-party CF cards to instantly create minuscule Linux systems based entirely on CF cards. A wide variety of third-party CF peripheral cards can be used with the CFC, including RS232/485, Ethernet, Bluetooth, USB, 802.11, GSM, GPRS, GPS, and more. A combination power supply / bus expander module on a separate CF card, as well as a tiny 8-slot CF card backplane, are available as options." An anonymous reader adds "The card is based on a Freescale MPC5272 system-on-chip processor and contains 32MB of SDRAM and 8MB of Flash memory, and it comes with a uClinux based operating system and GNU development/debug tools."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's First Linux Computer In A CF Card More

World's First Linux Computer In A CF Card

Comments Filter:

  • CFCC (Score:5, Funny)

    by mfh ( 56 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:03AM (#9908242) Homepage Journal
    Yes but would a Beowulf cluster of CFCs harm the environment? Yes, the Compact Flash Computer has the unlikely acronym CFC. I move that we change that acronym to CFCC [Compact Flash Card Computer] in hopes the ozone doesn't sue [epa.gov].

    • Re:CFCC (Score:2, Funny)

      by sparcnut ( 775902 )
      So if you do call it a CFC not a CFCC, what do you call the software that runs on it? ...Vaporware?
    • But that's not entirely correct either .. It's really a Compact-Flash-Card-Format Computer (CFCFC). It's not made of flash, y'know.
      • So a Beowulf Cluster of them would be A Beowulf Cluster Compact-Flash-Card-Format Computer (ABCCFCFC)

  • Snap on Computer ... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Gopal.V ( 532678 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:06AM (#9908253) Homepage Journal
    According the article , there are no connectors - all are snap together stuff. This might however be higher on the cost side (800 bucks for a underpowered linux card ??)

    The good thing about this is however the "show off" effect :) .. Yeah linux is cool, dice it , slice it, even put it in a CF.

    I'm still thinking about building my own small PC , probably will be an old 386 or 486 chopped down to fit inside an OLD telephone case I have , add an LCD display (100x96) hooked off an old casio and then I'm stuck at writing drivers. If I can hookup the telephone keyboard and put the LCD in the telephone address book slot ... voila , a hidden PC :)

    • Another hidden PC... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:16AM (#9908310) Homepage
      ...was the one that was hidden in a pocket calculator. Replaced the original, made enough of a mock-up to pass any inspection, voila... suddenly you had a computer to bring to every exam, didn't get caught either. Though I hear rumors he spent time equal to or greater than the time he'd need to actually learn the subjects programming that damn thing.

      Kjella

      • Re:Another hidden PC... (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward
        he spent time equal to or greater than the time he'd need to actually learn the subjects programming that damn thing.

        Isn't that the point of hacking?

      • Someone on slashdot once said that they would spend 120% as much effort/resources on something if it employed technology as opposed to not...would this qualify perhaps, and if you sir are out there will you please stand up? I mean yes it took him more effort programming the damn thing than learning the subject but woudln't this also give him *programming experience* and therefor something more valuable than whatever it is he was learning?(although math is valuable [schnits.org].) So not only does this guy deserve credi
    • Old telephone you say, I guess VoIP might be a nice application. :-)

  • In other news... (Score:5, Funny)

    by k4_pacific ( 736911 ) <k4_pacific@yahoo . c om> on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:10AM (#9908270) Homepage Journal
    A group of hackers in Europe announced today that they got Linux to run on a single NAND gate. Quote the project leader, "This way, a single 74x00 quad-NAND chip can be used to build a four processor supercomputer." In reponse to this news, Intel chief Craig Barrett removed his CEO hat and punched his fist through it in a fit of exasperated consternation.

  • Linux in a piece of tofu! (Score:5, Funny)

    by ArmorFiend ( 151674 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:12AM (#9908283) Homepage Journal
    I've created a embedded linux system out of a piece of tofu. Its superior to regular tofu in every way! Of course, since tofu has no I/O ports this is kinda useless, but wow is it cool.

    Come back next week, I should have an embedded linux system running in a fried chicken drumstick.

  • microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)

    by caitsith01 ( 606117 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:13AM (#9908287) Journal
    No, not that microsoft, the kind from Neuromancer. The idea of placing fully functional software systems on small, portable pieces of data storage that can easily be slotted into different hardware reminds me a lot of Neuromancer and similar books, as well as games like Deus Ex. I don't know about the more complex microsofts from Gibson et al, but I can certainly imagine something that could translate spoken language being stored on something like this... visiting France? Just slot your French translator card into your portable wearable computer.

    In the short term, this could be part of a counter-revolutionary movement against the notion of ubiquitous wireless computing - rather than making most devices dumb terminals that rely on a remote centralised server for their data repository, this could effectively make any dumb piece of hardware a fully fledged computer, even without a network connection (indeed, it might be preferable for security or logistical reasons not to have to worry about a network).

    I wonder what kinds of things we'll be able to do with this type of technology when memory cards can hold 100s of gigabytes of data?

  • Hasn't Sun's plans for motherboard-less... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rokzy ( 687636 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:13AM (#9908289)
    ...computing (it was duped 3 times so you must have all seen it) just got 0wn3d?

  • Beauwolf Cluster... inside a PDA! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NoMercy ( 105420 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:14AM (#9908298)
    Tempting, isn't it :)

  • The custom-built pda (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jsebrech ( 525647 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:15AM (#9908301)
    You know, this could be a great way to bring upgradeability and extreme customizeability to portable devices.

    One could imagine a sleeve where you plug in a cpu card, some data storage cards, a wifi card, and so on. Sleeves could be upgraded to provide new peripherals. You would use firewire, usb or some other generic protocol to provide the interface between the sleeve, the cards, and the outside world (possibly using stub cards that transform a cf card to a usb data storage card).

    That way when you need a bigger screen, you'd buy a new sleeve and dock your old cards into it. Cpu not fast enough? Just upgrade the cpu card, no problems with having to replace the entire pda.

    Why hasn't this been done yet? It seems like an untapped market just waiting to be discovered.

    • Re:The custom-built pda (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:36AM (#9908361) Journal
      Why hasn't this been done yet?

      Because most people, unfortunately, are not geek hobbyists, and think of computers in terms of application, not of mechanism. To them, this reconfigurability is just additional cost, complexity, and fragility to get a "follow the directions to assemble it yourself" device that performs some task that they want to do, like store lists of phone numbers. Sure, it drives us bonkers that we don't have a pretty interface and better support for the I2C bus (or internal USB in cases), interesting input (knobs, sliders, etc that can be interfaced with) devices, cheap interesting output devices (LED/LCD/VFD front-panel displays), thermometers, and the like. The typical computer user, though, doesn't give a damn about extending or reconfiguring their computer, because they want to accomplish a task, and don't really want to "figure out what to do to their computer to accomplish that task".

      Sigh.
      • Reconfigurability is only additional cost if it takes much effort. If increasing your CPU power is just as easy as putting a new CPU card into your "computer" (i.e. less complicated than getting cash at a cash machine!), then the non-geek will appreciate it. You don't actually have to think, just buy the card which does what you want, put it into a free slot, and voila.

        Unfortunately, I suspect the reality would again be plug&pray instead of plug&play.
    • When I read about "sleeves" and "cards", the idea that comes to my mind is cheating in poker. A micro-camera in a ring in your finger shows the cards as you deal them. Bluetooth connection to the computer in your pocket, which calculates the odds. Another bluetooth to your glasses, where a small speaker near your ear tells you how to play... From now on, beware of players who turn the stone in their ring towards the palm side of their hand when dealing!
  • An LCD driver and USB interface. They should put on one the mother board. Other than that looks prettyd good. Could this be a new standard for embeded systems? How about a PDA that you can update the CPU on?

    • Smartcard security (Score:4, Informative)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:49AM (#9908406) Journal
      Hmm...speaking of LCD displays...that's actually a very interesting idea.

      Currently, smartcards have one huge hole for use in secure environments -- they have no secure user-input or user-output channels. This means that if someone sets up a bogus ATM/card reader (which has been done oh so many times), they can swipe your PIN and since the interface, including hitting "OK" or not is all done through the reader, can hit "OK" for you.

      But if you can build a small computer with a simple interface (CF is a good choice, though a smartcard interface would also work), you can slap a display on it (actually, all you need is a calculator-style alphanumeric LCD strip) and a nine-button numeric keypad. You can enter your PIN directly to your card, and you can trust that the price being displayed on the card is the price that you are actually paying, and the payee being displayed is actually who the money is going to.

      For a long time, I've been wondering how long it will be until smartcards become standard for sales. The attacks on smartcards are largely doable because of a lack of untrusted readers (as I said, no keypad or display on-card). Smartcards are great for e-commerce, where you can have a reasonably trusted reader in the form of your computer. I figured that one day AmEx or someone will partner with Dell and Dell will start bundling smartcard readers with their systems (the cost of a smartcard reader is very, very low, and the potential savings with not having to deal with constant fraud attempts on credit cards, and the ability of vendors to actually trust and allow purchases coming from, say, Nigeria, is a significant benefit). Nobody's got around to shipping lots of computers with smartcard interfaces -- but *lots* of computers have CompactFlash interfaces. All that's needed is an open standard for communicating with "smartcard on CompactFlash", someone figuring out where they can get their paws on some cheap, durable LCD displays, slap some buttons on it, and you have one hell of a compelling commerce mechanism to replace the credit card.

      FWIW, while I'm sure credit card vendors have no interest in allowing such a thing, a smartcard vendor could provide actual privacy, not knowing about each one of your transactions, since your transactions cannot be (reasonably) forged.

      God, that would be cool. Anyone know how many mW CF can provide?

      • Nobody's got around to shipping lots of computers with smartcard interfaces

        Umm, gotta disagree with you there, every computer purchased by the US DoD is -required- to have a smartcard reader. Dell has a keyboard (model SK-somethingorother) that has the card reader built into the keyboard.

    • No, they shouldn't. You mentioned a PDA you can update the CPU on. Well, what if ATI releases the Imageon XXXX XT PE, and I only have an ATI Imageon X000 Pro soldered on?

  • too expensive! (Score:3, Funny)

    by mqx ( 792882 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:26AM (#9908337)

    C'mon! I'm waiting for the usual highly moderated /. comment "it's too expensive, I could build one myself for half the price ...".

  • Why so pricey? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:31AM (#9908351)
    Zawalnyski says he expects it to be less than $800 for an evaluation unit, with substantial quantity discounts.


    That product is uber-geek, but its price could completely cancel the advantage of using Linux in a small system like this. There already are slightly bigger Linux ready single board computers in the $200 - $300 range.
  • I don't really understand the rush to make linux as small as possible. I mean honestly, Feather and Damn Small Linux can already fit on USB thumb drives. Has this just become a contest to see how stripped down of a distrobution people can produce? We understand that Linux is versatile, and that we can apply it in small storage spaces if need be. But really, to what extent do Linux developers need to keep hammering the point that Linux can fit in spaces that the Windows kernel would need a magnifying glass j
    • Actually, once the prices come down, I may make use of this. For now, I am looking at some products where I will use java and 8051's.
    • The point here is that the whole damn computer is inside the CF card, processor, ram, storage and EVERYTHING else :)
    • No you do not use CF cards enough.

      First, you have to remember the read/write cycles on them.

      Second, given the extensibility of this product, and the fact that it is solid state plus low weight, it can now be used in places that no normal PC would be able to go. I.e. high pressure, high heat, etc. Why? Because it can easily be enclosed in a protective casing to do so.

      That's why it's important to do all the minimization work. To enable a generation of tinkerers to take their dreams of exploration further.
    • The CF card is actually RUNNING linux, not just storing it.. Its an actual comptuer in there... Just is a CF ( standard ) form factor.

      Ans yes, size matters. so you can shove it into your toaster, microwave oven, etc..

    • I don't really understand the rush to make linux as small as possible.

      Here's a contrived (but realistic) example: a small manufacturer makes powered dollies that can move loads of up to 1000 lbs by the operator pushing the handle on the dolly. Now they identify a market opportunity for a smarter dolly that has variable maximum speed depending on how much is loaded onto it, won't move if the weight is over the limit, has steerable front wheels that will turn at a rate that won't send the load flying off

  • Gumstix (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Stigmata669 ( 517894 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @09:45AM (#9908389)
    If you are really into tiny linux computers, you might want to check out Gumstix [gumstix.com] which are about the same size, in a different shape (like a stick of gum... get it?). It comes with USB (client not host), rs232, bluetooth, and a MMC/SD interface. Running the Intel Xscale, you can have a 200 mhz machine for a little over $100. Now if I could only justify buying one of these... maybe the tiniest wireless webserver?

    • Gumstix vs CFC (Score:3, Informative)

      by po8 ( 187055 )

      The potential advantage of this CFC thing over the gumstix [gumstix.com] (which is cool) is that the stupid client USB port on the gumstix means that it's going to be a struggle to attach USB peripherals. With the CF bus, I should be able to attach CF peripherals to the CFC easily. Presumably the next gumstix will based on a part with the new USB 2.0 controllers which can be switched between host and client modes. This would be good.

      OTOH, the gumstix ARM should be substantially faster than the CFC Moto ColdFire part.

      • Yup, USB host mode coming soon to a gumstix near you. I just need to get back from my european vacation and make sure the software's all working...

        • Hooray! I have all kinds of big plans for such a device. I'm assuming that this is the kind that I can turn around: use it as a client with a host PC, and yet as a host with a client peripheral?

          Looking forward to it---thanks for the note!

          • I haven't looked at it, but from memory, the linux kernel only allows either regular USB, or "gadget" USB, but not both -- so while the hardware can switch, I'm not sure that Linux can... But that's not definitive, just a vague memory of the menuconfig screen.
    • Gumstix is cool! Thanks for the post. I think it may run skype with a little tweaking. My goal is to receive calls without my desktop on.

      Anyone have a better $150 solution?

    • get back to me when gumstix has ethernet. I sent them an email asking them if they were planning on adding it and they indicated that they were, but didn't give me any more information. It blows my mind that they added bluetooth before adding ethernet.

      • It blows my mind that they added bluetooth before adding ethernet

        They're obviously targeting the small portable device market rather than the network device/appliance market. The fact that it has a USB client port but no USB host capability pretty much proves this. I haven't used bluetooth myself, but what's wrong with getting one of those USB bluetooth "dongles" for your laptop or PC? With its low power usage (and low price!) the gumstix sound great for a battery-operated remote sensing device. Just

      • Bluetooth was just really easy to do -- basically just glue an infineon bluetooth module onto the PXA bluetooth UART. It's a serial protocol from the PXA to the bluetooth module, so it's I think (from memory) only 4 traces, and we can easily fit it all on the gumstix board itself instead of on a daughterboard. Ethernet, even 16-bit ethernet, is trickier -- you need a whole chipset plus a bunch more traces, plus you have to carry a bunch of bus lines from the PXA to a daughtercard, due to the space constra

  • Freescale (Score:4, Informative)

    by LordMyren ( 15499 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @10:04AM (#9908468) Homepage
    Motorola spunoff (all|a large section) of their IC department and thus was born Freescale. They've been making CPU's for apple for decades.

    IIRC, PowerPC was engineered to be backwards compatible with 68k. To preserve apple's software. The main dis-advantage of this is that you'd have to support the umpteen billion addressing modes.

    There is a RISC'ified alternate side though: The ColdFire processors [freescale.com]. They've been a uClinux target for a while.

    However, whats truly notable is that the new MFC54xx series has a mmu [linuxdevices.com]. No need for uClinux, it runs real linux. Quite well i'd imaging: 133mhz DDR ram, 433 mhz, pci-interface, dual ethernet (100 mbit), usb and onboard crypto accelerator. All with a low advertised power consumption.

    Still awaiting the Base Support Package. C'mon Metroworks.

    Myren

    • Re:Freescale (Score:3, Informative)

      by Erich ( 151 )

      IIRC, PowerPC was engineered to be backwards compatible with 68k. To preserve apple's software. The main dis-advantage of this is that you'd have to support the umpteen billion addressing modes.

      No, you're completely wrong. PPC is a fairly traditional RISC, 32 registers plus some special ones, and a rich instruction set, but ALU operations operate on registers, not memory.

      Apple did have a 68k emulator in their OS to be able to run 68k binaries.

      On the other hand, the early coldfire processors, like

  • Hardware trojans? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ratso Baggins ( 516757 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @11:06AM (#9908711) Homepage
    If one was to obtain (peel or print) an appropriate sticker, it would be relatively easy to create an ethernet or wifi card with a sinister personality.
    • If one was to obtain (peel or print) an appropriate sticker, it would be relatively easy to create an ethernet or wifi card with a sinister personality.

      With the proliferation of the do-not-photograph-here areas, a CF card that would look like "empty" despite keeping data stored on could be a neat toy for every amateur spy. Take pics, and let the "CF card" encrypt them with a public key, and "stealth" them in the VFAT. Keep the private key off-camera. Then come home, put the card to the reader, enter a PIN

  • i didn't see mention of it in the article. anyone know what processor it uses?

  • visions of linux-powered newton dance in my head (Score:4, Interesting)

    by option8 ( 16509 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @11:41AM (#9908873) Homepage
    i read the blurb, and skimmed the article, and immediately an idea formed in my head.

    i have a newton messagepad 2100 (two of them, actually). i'd love to be able to shove this little CF module into its PC card slot (with one of the PCMCIA/CF converter doohickeys i have) and use the newton's display with the processor (and all the other good bits) on the card. 8 megs of flash and 32 megs of ram is considerably more than the newton's 4 of each. i'd love the capacity to run a good, scaled down linux install built for PDA installs on the newt's half VGA screen and still-impressive battery life.

    this would be a sweet hack, if someone could manage it. hell, i'd buy three.

    incidentally, the newt has a strongARM 110 running at 161.9 MHz, which i've read does 150 MIPS (considerably more than the 63 the CFC does)
  • The cpu used here is a part of the "Coldfire" range.
    The 68K compatability come from the fact that it's
    evolved from the 68060 RISC core.Lose the FPU/MMU &
    other funny knobbly bits and you have a cool
    embedded CPU cheap made in millions for HP printers /routers and the like.
    The spec is very similar to the evaluation board supplied by motorola for $400
    or one of the upmarket palm pilots at half that price. The CF card is cute damn
    expensive way of buying $40 of parts.
  • the question is, will it run skype?

  • Great! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mac Degger ( 576336 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @01:26PM (#9909395) Journal
    Now this is what I want someone to do: hook this up a bluetooth module and a gsm/sim card unit and encase it in a little box with a battery large enough (and it doesn't mean mega amperage, 'cos there's no screen!) to last a week or two.

    Why, you wonder? Well, so I can throw out my cell phone and replace it with a matchbox I just need to carry around my person/in my jacket pocket and use my shiny new Tungsten T3 as a cell phone!

    And this is for those of you who say "wait for a smartphone or get a treo"; I don't need a smartphone, I want a PDA which I can call with (kinda like the XDA thing, but then that runs windows, which I don't want). And a treo? Come on...I can't really read and work with spreadsheets on that tiny screen, much less a book (which I do frequently).

    And as a final thought: yeah, maybe in five years time I'll get a pda with a large (roll out OLED) screen which can also make calls...but I'd buy a little matchstickbox sized linux/bluetooth/gsm/sim-unit NOW.
  • Does it inclue a mini case of Bawls?

  • Needs two ethernet connectors (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DickBreath ( 207180 ) on Saturday August 07, 2004 @01:53PM (#9909506) Homepage
    My ideal tiny system, which has been discussed before, is one which is physically tiny, but has two ethernet ports.

    There are many great applications for such tiny systems.

    A Linux kernel with little more than a special /sbin/init program.

    The device is used in a corporation, such as in an office or cubicle. It is plugged in between the ethernet jack on the wall, and the legitimate device, such as a PC.

    During normal business hours, it captures the mac address of the legitimate PC. It then simply forwards all ethernet packets in both directions. (Not IP, but ALL ethernet frames.)

    During business hours, it also captures and stores any interesting packets that it sniffs, including passwords.

    Late at night, it uses the mac address of the legitimate device (so nothing looks fishy) and makes an IRC connection to a private chat channel where it just silently listens for coded commands from its master, including commands to upload anything interesting that it captured today.

    Unfortunantly such dual nic tiny computers are so pricey as to require careful selection of where one would choose to install them. Zombied winboxes are much cheaper.
  • So, is this the predecessor to the Isolinear Chip arrays found under nearly every control panel on the Enterprise?
  • Once these things are cheap enough, commercial software will be sold with its own computer. The code will be in ROM on a CF sized module with its own CPU, memory and so on. You plug it in to a slot and it will be on a network in your PC. Doesn't matter if the OS is Linux or whatever. Your PC just presents the UI. It can help out with co-processors for things like games etc.

    Buy a word processor and you have to buy a physical thing. If you want to be a software "pirate", you have to steal an object a

    • So, console video games are distributed in hardware only form, yes? ROMs in fact, for the NES, SNES, Genesis, and many other early game consoles. But they're all emulated today. Further, it would seem that at least in development, some form of rapid prototyping would be necessary to prevent massive wastes of hardware. As such, this only seems to be a method of adding a great deal of complication which is unncessary. Some software today already require hardware dongles. How effective those are I haven

      • Yes but in game consoles, the instructions are copied from ROM and run by the CPU on the console. The idea is to never copy the code to the general purpose CPU. It remains in the chip with the CPU that runs it and there's no interface to the actual code. It's true you can emulate anything, but I think reverse-engineering this could be made difficult enough to be more expensive than it's worth.

        Getting the chip right before going into production is something that happens all the time today. This would
  • http://sourceforge.net/projects/compactbsd "CompactBSD is a powerful set of tools that allow you to build your own customized, lightweight distribution of OpenBSD and then burn it onto compact flash so that it can be run on an embedded PC platform such as FatPort's FatPoint (www.fatport.com)"

Slashdot Top Deals

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Close