Moblin


Status
Not open for further replies.

ashadocat

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
134
Have you guys seen the moblin project? It might be worth considering for use on pandora. I'm not exactly sure what it does but I think it's a GUI
 
looks like they're trying to make a community linux distro for mobile devices. That's just by looking at the front page. might be worth looking into
 
Svartalf said:
Megamixman said:
Moblin is aimed at Atom aka X86.
Pandora = ARM.
Maemo is far more applicable.
Considering there's quite a bit of overlap...



Moblin is being optimized for Atom though. There is definately UI overlap, but i believe this is being done in Hildon as well so those changes should come to Maemo as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Megamixman said:
Moblin is being optimized for Atom though. There is definately UI overlap, but i believe this is being done in Hildon as well so those changes should come to Maemo as well.
Heh... There's quite a lot larger overlap than you realize. It's not just UI.

To optimize for Atom on a mobile device is to optimize something for ARM or MIPS on the embedded
side as well. It's not magic special different just because it's on Atom versus ARM unless you're hand-coding
the assembly code. When you optimize for embedded mobile on x86, you're also getting it for ARM and
MIPS- because the bulk of everything is in C and C++, and the same things that make sense on x86
also make sense on the other ISA's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Svartalf said:
Megamixman said:
Moblin is being optimized for Atom though. There is definately UI overlap, but i believe this is being done in Hildon as well so those changes should come to Maemo as well.
Heh... There's quite a lot larger overlap than you realize. It's not just UI.

To optimize for Atom on a mobile device is to optimize something for ARM or MIPS on the embedded
side as well. It's not magic special different just because it's on Atom versus ARM unless you're hand-coding
the assembly code. When you optimize for embedded mobile on x86, you're also getting it for ARM and
MIPS- because the bulk of everything is in C and C++, and the same things that make sense on x86
also make sense on the other ISA's.



Not necessarily, If you were optimizing for proc's with out MMUs or such then that statement would make sense. When you're optimizing for a specific architecture, and more importantly in this case, a specific power management architecture, things don't easily go cross platform. They can both help and hurt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Megamixman said:
Not necessarily, If you were optimizing for proc's with out MMUs or such then that statement would make sense. When you're optimizing for a specific architecture, and more importantly in this case, a specific power management architecture, things don't easily go cross platform. They can both help and hurt.
Heh... You just told this to a gent that actually DOES this for a living. :D

Most of the stuff DOES unless it DIRECTLY works with the power management handling. The OS takes care of most the details of memory management, power management, etc. Things like display drivers would be the problem edges there. Things like the games, the UI, etc. wouldn't BE optimized against that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Svartalf said:
Megamixman said:
Not necessarily, If you were optimizing for proc's with out MMUs or such then that statement would make sense. When you're optimizing for a specific architecture, and more importantly in this case, a specific power management architecture, things don't easily go cross platform. They can both help and hurt.
Heh... You just told this to a gent that actually DOES this for a living. :D

Most of the stuff DOES unless it DIRECTLY works with the power management handling. The OS takes care of most the details of memory management, power management, etc. Things like display drivers would be the problem edges there. Things like the games, the UI, etc. wouldn't BE optimized against that.


You do what for a living? Code OSes or optimize for embedded systems? I don't do either, but the research I'm doing does involve taking such aspects into account so I don't royally screw over the people that do deal with these issues.

You also kind of made my point. Power Management varies from architecture to architecture. This is even more true in embedded systems where SoCs are involved due to the highly variable power-plane load, which is what you optimize embedded kernels for. X86 Power Managemet is far more predictable in terms of how the power planes load, and the techniques involved are well developed. This doesn't mean that you can't optimize the kernel when a specific architecture is targetted, or even further when a specifc SoC setup ( Atom is supposed to end up as a SoC) is the target.

UI, and anything that builds on top of the OS core is mostly independent, and is very likely that the changes will be brought upstream to Hildon. Maemo has been doing this for some time now, so I don't see why Moblin wouldn't either. This means what ever Moblin has different from Hildon is either a.) Changes that haven't been commited to Hildon or b.) Atom specific and for the most part can be ignored for ARM.

There are exceptions, but rare. For instance, the Moblin team has their own Power Manager based off GPM, but hacked down to a much smaller size. So far, Hildon hasn't adopted it, but as the Moblin PPM becomes stable, Hildon is likely to adopt it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MOBLIN IS THE MOST STUPID CHOICE FOR OS EVER. Here is why:
"Smartbooks" etc Arm based chipsets (OMAP, Snapdragon, Tegra etc) are superior than any Atom x86 in term of portability etc.
ARM chipset vs Intel ATOM lacks at only one point: Windows (in)compatibility. Wintel sinergy is (for Intel netbooks) *The Only Defense* against Arm smartbooks (smartphones, handhelds...).
And this is where Intel Moblin should sit??? Instead Windows - mainly at x86 platform??? omg. This is just a FUD tool (remember e.g. MS "shared source"?).
BTW, Intel is active member of Open Handset Alliance (wiki). Open Handset Alliance = Android! So much about Moblin...

However, *after* porting other (Linux based) OSes @Pandora, we could use some of tools that Moblin project produces (if any).
 
darkborn said:
MOBLIN IS THE MOST STUPID CHOICE FOR OS EVER. Here is why:
"Smartbooks" etc Arm based chipsets (OMAP, Snapdragon, Tegra etc) are superior than any Atom x86 in term of portability etc.
ARM chipset vs Intel ATOM lacks at only one point: Windows (in)compatibility. Wintel sinergy is (for Intel netbooks) *The Only Defense* against Arm smartbooks (smartphones, handhelds...).
And this is where Intel Moblin should sit??? Instead Windows - mainly at x86 platform??? omg. This is just a FUD tool (remember e.g. MS "shared source"?).
BTW, Intel is active member of Open Handset Alliance (wiki). Open Handset Alliance = Android! So much about Moblin...

However, *after* porting other (Linux based) OSes @pandora, we could use some of tools that Moblin project produces (if any).

Let me rephrase that so that my brain can parse the text more easily (note: free translation):

I think that Moblin shouldn't be chosen as the Pandora OS under any circumstances, for the following reasons:
  1. Computers with Arm based chip sets (for instance OMAP®, Snapdragon® or Tegra®), the so-called "Smartbooks", are far superior compared to any Atom x86-based computer in terms of portability etc.
  2. The ARM chip set only has one disadvantage compared to the Intel ATOM®: Microsoft® Windows® incompatibility. The so-called "Wintel" symbiosis is the only defense that Intel has against Arm-based computers.
Should we really utilize Moblin in a situation like this? Instead of Windows® - an OS mainly targeted at the x86 platform? Oh my God.
This is just a FUD tool similar to the Microsoft "Shared Source" framework...

By the way, Intel is an active member of the Open Handset Alliance (Wikipedia article). The Open Handset Alliance puts a lot of focus on Android! What chances does Moblin stand in a situation like this?

However, after porting other Linux based operating systems to the Pandora, we could use some of tools that Moblin project produces, if any.

Now, my comments:
  • No one has suggested that Moblin should be the primary operating system for the Pandora.
  • The Moblin project is being lead by the Linux Foundation, so it's a completely open source system, and Intel does not "control" the project.
  • Moblin does not currently run on Arm-produced chip sets, but it can be ported quite easily, since the code is completely open source.
  • Moblin has several innovative GUI systems that cannot be found in other Linux-based operating systems, which makes Moblin an excellent alternative for some Pandora users that aren't technically inclined and only want to have an usable handheld system.
  • We have never considered switching the chip set in the Pandora for an Intel Atom® based one, what makes you think this?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dflemstr; I don't agree with your translation, let me suggest this much more liberally paraphrased one:

Moblin is not a good choice for x86 handhelds. ARM based devices are preferable because they use less power and space and cost less. The only advantage x86 devices have is that they can run Windows. So why is Intel pushing a Linux-based OS for Atom-based devices when it won't allow users to run (much) software that can't be ran on the ARM devices?

On the bright side, some Moblin tools could be useful for Pandora.

Of course, this still doesn't explain the thread title or why it's in the Pandora section.
 
Did this opinion really warrant an entirely separate thread to the Mobilin one just below it?
 
Loonie said:
Did this opinion really warrant an entirely separate thread to the Mobilin one just below it?

+1. Maybe we can get the two topics merged? Chip, Squidge, are one of you two willing to do that?

-God Ginrai
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dflemstr said:
Let me rephrase that so that my brain can parse the text more easily (note: free translation)
Thanks for your "free translation" (or more like "free interpretation"?) of my post. As you see, I'm not a native English speaker, and also I'm quite lazy with typing... However seems that your "brain parsing" did not work well enough. Opposite to you, seems that Exophase got it instantly. So, maybe it is not about my poor English vocabulary...

Now, my comments:
  • No one has suggested that Moblin should be the primary operating system for the Pandora.
Nobody said that, why do you mention that? But many wants alternative to Angstrom (e.g. Android). In my opinion, Moblin is just tool of FUD strategy here.

  • The Moblin project is being lead by the Linux Foundation, so it's a completely open source system, and Intel does not "control" the project.
Nope, but look it this way: Google does not "control" Android, but is spending millions at e.g. Summer of Code, and now we got Android C/C++ NDK. Do I have to explain more?

  • Moblin does not currently run on Arm-produced chip sets, (...) which makes Moblin an excellent alternative for some Pandora users
I'm sorry, but this is my "free translation" of that what you want to say :lol:

  • We have never considered switching the chip set in the Pandora for an Intel Atom® based one, what makes you think this?
I think that you really like to put words in other mouth. What makes you think that I EVER thought about it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exophase said:
dflemstr; I don't agree with your translation, let me suggest this much more liberally paraphrased one:

Moblin is not a good choice for x86 handhelds. ARM based devices are preferable because they use less power and space and cost less. The only advantage x86 devices have is that they can run Windows. So why is Intel pushing a Linux-based OS for Atom-based devices when it won't allow users to run (much) software that can't be ran on the ARM devices?

On the bright side, some Moblin tools could be useful for Pandora.
Thanks, seems that you understand it well. OK, I'll have to explain a little bit more:
ARM based devices are preferable because they
  • use much more less power, and as a consequence
  • could work "whole" day (8-12h) - like e.g. cell phones
  • do not produce heat, so
  • don't need fan, so
  • could be much thinner, and
  • could be light weight, and with all of that
  • are almost half price then ATOM counterpart
et cetera
Of course, this still doesn't explain the thread title or why it's in the Pandora section.
Ok, maybe the title of topic should be THE WORST ALTERNATIVE OS CHOICE FOR PANDORA. And some pool.
It is in Pandora section because I found too much efforts to bring Moblin to Pandora, probably instead some other OS/platform (Android, Maemo, WebOS, or some more "classic" Linux distro).
I don't think it is just a matter of free will. IMO, main goal of Intels efforts at Moblin is to slow down Android, so that Intel (and probably other players) have enough time to prepare some kind of answer (Windows 7?) against ARM.
Question is: Why should Intel "attack" Windows with Moblin Linux, at its own monopol (ATOM x86) hardware ecosystem - Windows as its only advantage against ARM?
Are those reliable efforts, and do we need it at Pandora? I don't want situation when people thinking about "Pandora", and first word that comes to their mind should be "Trojan horse". Maybe mythical, but not correct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top