Comments on: CherryPal, Take Two http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/ Tue, 27 Jul 2010 04:18:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Daman http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-201 Daman Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:09:09 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-201 Well, i'd argue that the PowerPC architechure is better than an intel architechure, because every processor and its architechure has its pros and cons. It all depends on what you are doing with the processor. Dont get me wrong, I do like the PowerPC architechure. I just dont think its that much better than Intel's architechure. Well, i’d argue that the PowerPC architechure is better than an intel architechure, because every processor and its architechure has its pros and cons. It all depends on what you are doing with the processor. Dont get me wrong, I do like the PowerPC architechure. I just dont think its that much better than Intel’s architechure.

]]> By: Green Tech Girl | Keeping the CherryPal in Perspective http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-172 Green Tech Girl | Keeping the CherryPal in Perspective Wed, 17 Dec 2008 20:11:24 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-172 [...] CherryPal has failed is in its implemenation of Linux, which, as discussed here in length, ends up eating the CPU so the machine often slows down to a crawl doing basic tasks. The launch of [...] [...] CherryPal has failed is in its implemenation of Linux, which, as discussed here in length, ends up eating the CPU so the machine often slows down to a crawl doing basic tasks. The launch of [...]

]]> By: jcmarcos http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-171 jcmarcos Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:02:26 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-171 Hello James. I recall your nickname from the PowerDeveloper site. Have you received your Cherrypal yet? Where will you publish your review? Hello James. I recall your nickname from the PowerDeveloper site. Have you received your Cherrypal yet? Where will you publish your review?

]]> By: muriani http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-170 muriani Wed, 17 Dec 2008 04:13:37 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-170 @john: You've pretty much hit it right on the nose. I have got the cherrypal now, but there are some very serious issues so far. The device is not using a PowerVR-native X server AT ALL. It's using Xfbdev, which is a raw framebuffer device. VERY cpu intensive. I'm working on getting a native driver going, but the vendor support is seemingly rather hard to come by... @john:

You’ve pretty much hit it right on the nose.

I have got the cherrypal now, but there are some very serious issues so far. The device is not using a PowerVR-native X server AT ALL. It’s using Xfbdev, which is a raw framebuffer device. VERY cpu intensive.
I’m working on getting a native driver going, but the vendor support is seemingly rather hard to come by…

]]> By: Adam Clamp http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-169 Adam Clamp Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:48:34 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-169 CherryPal huh! I picked up this link via Wikipedia and the cloud computing entry and though CherryPal, whats this all about then? Low and behold another low power PC. I say another because I've been trying out the Cranberry computer that is available here in the UK that consumes only 7 Watts. I must admit its great to hear of yet more computers with users in mind who just need something to provide them withe the basics such as Word Processing and Internet and Email. So many people own computers that they dont really need and that they are only using a fraction of the resources and power they offer. If we only use what we need then just think how much we could reduce the carbon emissions created by the use of computers. We currently use computers in a very inefficient way, but at the end of the day we can supply all the low power systems we want but it really starts at behavioural change. If there are more lower power options and people are aware of them and that they are a better option for them and better suit their needs and also save them money and energy then maybe, just maybe they will pick them over a high carbon emitting laptop or desktop computer. They also have to look good. There are a lot of low power alternatives on the market and I hate to say it but they look terrible and we have to ask ourselves, and we all know the answer of course, what is the main reason Apple has been so successful? Answer: They look great! So what we need is a great looking low power alternative that is a design classic like the mac, this will help it sell and grow the market for low power devices and also take them from the geek world to the mainstream. On an end note its good to see bamboo being used more but I cannot see its use increasing if the difference between a standard finish and a bamboo finish is £120 as with the new mini Dell computers. Thats just not going to go mainstream. Make a sustainable and less toxic material a standard finish then it will. Oh well time to go and look into this CherryPal a bit more. Keep up the good work Green Tech Girl our planet needs us. Adam - The Green IT Company CherryPal huh!
I picked up this link via Wikipedia and the cloud computing entry and though CherryPal, whats this all about then?
Low and behold another low power PC. I say another because I’ve been trying out the Cranberry computer that is available here in the UK that consumes only 7 Watts.
I must admit its great to hear of yet more computers with users in mind who just need something to provide them withe the basics such as Word Processing and Internet and Email. So many people own computers that they dont really need and that they are only using a fraction of the resources and power they offer.
If we only use what we need then just think how much we could reduce the carbon emissions created by the use of computers. We currently use computers in a very inefficient way, but at the end of the day we can supply all the low power systems we want but it really starts at behavioural change. If there are more lower power options and people are aware of them and that they are a better option for them and better suit their needs and also save them money and energy then maybe, just maybe they will pick them over a high carbon emitting laptop or desktop computer.
They also have to look good. There are a lot of low power alternatives on the market and I hate to say it but they look terrible and we have to ask ourselves, and we all know the answer of course, what is the main reason Apple has been so successful? Answer: They look great!
So what we need is a great looking low power alternative that is a design classic like the mac, this will help it sell and grow the market for low power devices and also take them from the geek world to the mainstream.

On an end note its good to see bamboo being used more but I cannot see its use increasing if the difference between a standard finish and a bamboo finish is £120 as with the new mini Dell computers. Thats just not going to go mainstream. Make a sustainable and less toxic material a standard finish then it will.

Oh well time to go and look into this CherryPal a bit more.

Keep up the good work Green Tech Girl our planet needs us.

Adam – The Green IT Company

]]> By: John http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-168 John Tue, 16 Dec 2008 05:32:40 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-168 Regarding poor browser performance, Atrawog made the following comment at the TG Daily.com CherryPal review at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40549/135/: "Try turning off disk caching in Firefox: SQLite performance currently sucks badly on SSD storage devices. SQLite is used by Firefox a lot. And especially its use for disk caching can bring Firefox to a standstill on a flash based system. Try turning it off and see if it improves performance: http://www.davidtan.org/tips-reduce-firefox-memory-cache-usage/" Might be worth a try, plus it saves wear and tear on the Flash. Regarding poor browser performance, Atrawog made the following comment at the TG Daily.com CherryPal review at http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40549/135/:

“Try turning off disk caching in Firefox:
SQLite performance currently sucks badly on SSD storage devices. SQLite is used by Firefox a lot. And especially its use for disk caching can bring Firefox to a standstill on a flash based system. Try turning it off and see if it improves performance:
http://www.davidtan.org/tips-reduce-firefox-memory-cache-usage/”

Might be worth a try, plus it saves wear and tear on the Flash.

]]> By: John http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-167 John Tue, 16 Dec 2008 04:15:25 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-167 muriani: Thank you for your comments. I'll be interested in your review of CherryPal after you've played with it. Amplifying your comment that Mac and Amiga had an OS specifically written for the hardware, I'll go one step further: they had an OS written for the intended use of the device as a personal computer. While I have a great deal of admiration for Linux -- especially as it has served as a bridge away from MS Windows -- the fact remains that Unix is a time-sharing system designed to support multiple users and Linux carries all that baggage along, in essence requiring a PC owner to become a system administrator. Most of my programming has been Power PC architecture in the embedded world, where you have to watch every KB or you'll run out. In my case there was no such thing as swap space and memory management was mostly used to define cacheability. We didn't have an operating system as such. I figured that an OS never improves performance -- it only slows things down. Unless you really need an OS because you cannot survive without preemptive multitasking (other than device interrupts) or other compelling reasons, I always argue against it for embedded systems. For a personal computer, all I really want from an OS is a nice hierarchical file system, clean simple multitasking, clean reliable memory management, and an easy way to get at devices including a 2-D graphics engine. Linux provides this except for "clean, simple, and easy" and I get a huge amount of who-knows-what in addition to the small core I need. I used to program Macintosh OS back in the 6.x days. With 7.0, the OS became too complex for one person to understand it any more IMO. muriani:

Thank you for your comments. I’ll be interested in your review of CherryPal after you’ve played with it.

Amplifying your comment that Mac and Amiga had an OS specifically written for the hardware, I’ll go one step further: they had an OS written for the intended use of the device as a personal computer. While I have a great deal of admiration for Linux — especially as it has served as a bridge away from MS Windows — the fact remains that Unix is a time-sharing system designed to support multiple users and Linux carries all that baggage along, in essence requiring a PC owner to become a system administrator.

Most of my programming has been Power PC architecture in the embedded world, where you have to watch every KB or you’ll run out. In my case there was no such thing as swap space and memory management was mostly used to define cacheability. We didn’t have an operating system as such. I figured that an OS never improves performance — it only slows things down. Unless you really need an OS because you cannot survive without preemptive multitasking (other than device interrupts) or other compelling reasons, I always argue against it for embedded systems.

For a personal computer, all I really want from an OS is a nice hierarchical file system, clean simple multitasking, clean reliable memory management, and an easy way to get at devices including a 2-D graphics engine. Linux provides this except for “clean, simple, and easy” and I get a huge amount of who-knows-what in addition to the small core I need.

I used to program Macintosh OS back in the 6.x days. With 7.0, the OS became too complex for one person to understand it any more IMO.

]]> By: muriani http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-166 muriani Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:58:04 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-166 Also, the original Macintosh OS was incredibly primitive compared to OSes nowadays. Linux is HUGE. This is an OS that you can run this website from. (I know people who run forums from an Efika, SQL database included) The latest commercial OS that would actually run speedily on hardware like this would have been MacOS 8.6, and possibly even OS9. Or BeOS. Oh, if I could have a machine like this running BeOS... Also, the original Macintosh OS was incredibly primitive compared to OSes nowadays. Linux is HUGE. This is an OS that you can run this website from. (I know people who run forums from an Efika, SQL database included)
The latest commercial OS that would actually run speedily on hardware like this would have been MacOS 8.6, and possibly even OS9.
Or BeOS. Oh, if I could have a machine like this running BeOS…

]]> By: muriani http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-165 muriani Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:51:25 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-165 @John: The issue with that argument is that the Macintosh (or Amiga for that matter), with all its limitations, had an OS written SPECIFICALLY for the hardware. What the CherryPal has (from everything I'm seeing, I don't get mine until tomorrow) is the generic PPC port of Xubuntu. Most people are running that on G3 or higher CPUs. The MPC5121 is a Freescale e300 core, which is a low-power/high-speed implementation of the PPC 603/603e - the FIRST fully 32-bit PowerPC core. The Linux you see on the CherryPal is the same one I'd install on my G4. Even Gentoo, compiled with all the 603e core optimizations, is still limited by the relatively primitive CPU when running applications. Nobody optimizes for ancient hardware anymore, except the MorphOS guys. Like I mentioned before, MorphOS runs very smoothly on even more limited hardware (the Efika only has 128MB RAM), but it was written from scratch and optimized for these specific platforms. This is also why we'll never see OSX for generic computers. The reason it's so smooth is because it's optimized for a certain set of hardware. @John:
The issue with that argument is that the Macintosh (or Amiga for that matter), with all its limitations, had an OS written SPECIFICALLY for the hardware.
What the CherryPal has (from everything I’m seeing, I don’t get mine until tomorrow) is the generic PPC port of Xubuntu. Most people are running that on G3 or higher CPUs.
The MPC5121 is a Freescale e300 core, which is a low-power/high-speed implementation of the PPC 603/603e – the FIRST fully 32-bit PowerPC core.
The Linux you see on the CherryPal is the same one I’d install on my G4.
Even Gentoo, compiled with all the 603e core optimizations, is still limited by the relatively primitive CPU when running applications. Nobody optimizes for ancient hardware anymore, except the MorphOS guys.
Like I mentioned before, MorphOS runs very smoothly on even more limited hardware (the Efika only has 128MB RAM), but it was written from scratch and optimized for these specific platforms.

This is also why we’ll never see OSX for generic computers. The reason it’s so smooth is because it’s optimized for a certain set of hardware.

]]> By: stephanie http://greentechgirl.com/green-computing/cherrypal-take-two/comment-page-1/#comment-163 stephanie Mon, 15 Dec 2008 20:49:53 +0000 http://greentechgirl.com/?p=119#comment-163 I'm not a Linux developer but I'm going to guess that maybe it has something to do with optimizing the kernel for the chipset. I’m not a Linux developer but I’m going to guess that maybe it has something to do with optimizing the kernel for the chipset.

]]>