Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #9939 > unrolled thread

can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? quiet_lad <gavcomedy@gmail.com> - 2012-03-07 19:54 -0800
    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-08 11:11 -0800
      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-08 21:58 -0800
        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? jc <john.comeau@gmail.com> - 2012-03-08 23:45 -0800
          Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-09 07:36 -0800
    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? marko <marko@marko.marko.marko> - 2012-03-09 14:43 +1100
      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-09 03:09 -0600
        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-09 02:10 -0800
          Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-09 05:34 -0600
            Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2012-03-09 08:44 -0800
              Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-09 11:19 -0600
                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-09 18:27 -0800
                  Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> - 2012-03-09 21:49 -0600
                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-09 21:09 -0800
                      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-09 21:11 -0800
                      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> - 2012-03-10 01:21 -0600
                        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-03-10 09:37 +0100
                          Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-10 08:31 -0800
                            Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Chris Baird <abuse@brushtail.apana.org.au> - 2012-03-11 12:29 +1100
                        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jecel <jecel@merlintec.com> - 2012-03-10 10:06 -0800
                          Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-10 11:41 -0800
                            Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Pablo Hugo Reda <pabloreda@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 14:17 -0800
                        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-03-14 00:15 +0100
                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-10 02:35 -0600
                  Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-03-14 00:13 +0100
                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-03-15 08:06 +0100
                      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-03-15 20:52 +0100
                        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Zbiggy <zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com> - 2012-03-15 21:37 +0100
                          Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-03-16 09:35 +0100
                            Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-16 02:27 -0700
                              Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-03-16 02:46 -0700
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-16 03:17 -0700
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-16 06:38 -0500
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-16 04:55 -0700
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Chris Baird <abuse@brushtail.apana.org.au> - 2012-03-16 23:12 +1100
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-03-16 14:43 +0100
                                Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 07:31 -0700
                                  Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-03-16 13:03 -0700
                                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jecel <jecel@merlintec.com> - 2012-03-16 13:57 -0700
                                      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-03-16 15:30 -0700
                                        Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Jecel <jecel@merlintec.com> - 2012-03-18 12:31 -0700
                                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 14:17 -0700
                                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-03-17 05:06 -0500
                                    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Chris Baird <abuse@brushtail.apana.org.au> - 2012-03-18 17:23 +1100
                            Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 17:06 -0700
      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? quiet_lad <gavcomedy@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 15:26 -0700
    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2012-03-10 13:28 -0800
      Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-03-14 10:26 +0000
    Re: can greenarrays produce something like rasberry pi? jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 17:09 -0700

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#9980

> There is a project called SqueakNOS which runs directly on PC hardware. Adapting that for the Raspberry Pi would be a very nice project. Two systems for kids run on top of Squeak: Etoys and Scratch. Both offer easy access to software based sprites (so the lack of information about the GPU wouldn't be too much of a problem).

If anybody does this, please post a link.

Jason

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9982

Jason

I have software base sprites, vector and bitmap drawing in a
framebuffer in my system, I not use GPU.

On 10 mar, 16:41, Jason Damisch <jasondami...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > There is a project called SqueakNOS which runs directly on PC hardware. Adapting that for the Raspberry Pi would be a very nice project. Two systems for kids run on top of Squeak: Etoys and Scratch. Both offer easy access to software based sprites (so the lack of information about the GPU wouldn't be too much of a problem).
>
> If anybody does this, please post a link.
>
> Jason

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10101

Roger Ivie wrote:
> As for Forth, it should be easy enough to convince gforth to mmap the
> framebuffer (assuming there is one),

Or use "glforth", the OpenGL bindings for Gforth.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9971

Roger Ivie <rivie@ridgenet.net> wrote:

> I suspect, but do not know for certain, that the GPU provides a
> framebuffer device for Linux to scribble in. The easiest thing to do
> would probably be to run a Forth in Linux that scribbles all over
> the framebuffer. That way you can just use the Linux device drivers
> and let the Raspberry Pi folks figure out how to talk to the GPU.

But why would you want to mess with a frame buffer?  You've got
hardware acceleration and OpenGL, so you might as well use it.

Andrew.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10100

Jason Damisch wrote:

> I wonder if somebody will make a Forth available for the pi?

There is.  Just install Gforth.  It's a complete Linux system with 
everything and the kitchen sink.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10124

In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote:

>> I wonder if somebody will make a Forth available for the pi?
>
> There is.  Just install Gforth.  It's a complete Linux system with 
> everything and the kitchen sink.

My guess is that Jason meant "standalone" Forth system for rpi...
-- 
Forth is a preserver of health (Hippocrates)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10140

Zbiggy wrote:

> In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote:
> 
>>> I wonder if somebody will make a Forth available for the pi?
>>
>> There is.  Just install Gforth.  It's a complete Linux system with
>> everything and the kitchen sink.
> 
> My guess is that Jason meant "standalone" Forth system for rpi...

Hm, the Gforth EC port for the Beagle Board might work on the Raspberry 
Pi as well.

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10141

In comp.lang.forth, Bernd Paysan wrote:

> Hm, the Gforth EC port for the Beagle Board might work on the Raspberry 
> Pi as well.

Made a quick-search, and I've found:

#v+
  I've been having a look at Gforth-EC lately, that's the embedded
  cross-compiled Forth support that has been included with Gforth all
  the time, but as it's well hidden and pretty undocumented, I guess most
  people wouldn't have noticed it.
#v-

Yes: learning Forth using i.a. GForth I wasn't aware about anything like
that.

It could be very interesting thing to run on r-pi, since r-pi is 4x cheaper
than Beagle Board.
-- 
Forth is a preserver of health (Hippocrates)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10153

From zbigniew2011REMOVE@gmail.REMOVE.com Fri Mar 16 06:35:35 2012

> It could be very interesting thing to run on r-pi, since r-pi is 4x
> cheaper than Beagle Board.

Yeah but there is one major difference you may not have taken into account:
r-pi doesn't actually exist but Beagle Board does. r-pi is not an example of
anything except how people can be duped by hype and marketing and build
castles in the sand while delivering nothing at all but announcements.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10154

On Mar 16, 9:35 am, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
> From zbigniew2011REM...@gmail.REMOVE.com Fri Mar 16 06:35:35 2012
>
> > It could be very interesting thing to run on r-pi, since r-pi is 4x
> > cheaper than Beagle Board.
>
> Yeah but there is one major difference you may not have taken into account:
> r-pi doesn't actually exist but Beagle Board does. r-pi is not an example of
> anything except how people can be duped by hype and marketing and build
> castles in the sand while delivering nothing at all but announcements.

Hi Nomen,

From the Farnell, UK website :
"Following the successful launch of Raspberry Pi Board B we've seen
unprecedented levels of interest in this product. Stocks from
Raspberry Pi of the initial production quantity are limited and these
have already sold out."
This doesn't sound like vapourware to me...

Best regards,
Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10155

Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> From the Farnell, UK website :
> "Following the successful launch of Raspberry Pi Board B we've seen
> unprecedented levels of interest in this product. Stocks from
> Raspberry Pi of the initial production quantity are limited and these
> have already sold out."
> This doesn't sound like vapourware to me...

I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.  There have been
any number of cheap arm boards in the past.  The rpi doesn't seem to
bring any technical breakthroughs.  Has nobody already put approx the
same straightforward combination of parts on a board, without the
undocumented chips needing binary blobs?  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10156

On Mar 16, 10:46 am, Paul Rubin <no.em...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Howerd <howe...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > From the Farnell, UK website :
> > "Following the successful launch of Raspberry Pi Board B we've seen
> > unprecedented levels of interest in this product. Stocks from
> > Raspberry Pi of the initial production quantity are limited and these
> > have already sold out."
> > This doesn't sound like vapourware to me...
>
> I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.  There have been
> any number of cheap arm boards in the past.  The rpi doesn't seem to
> bring any technical breakthroughs.  Has nobody already put approx the
> same straightforward combination of parts on a board, without the
> undocumented chips needing binary blobs?

Hi Paul,

I think it is because the rpi is designed from the start to teach
young people how to write games, in a simple way.
It is also cheap, and comes with Linux...
Who could ask for more?
Maybe it is better hyped, too.

Best regards,
Howerd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10158

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>> From the Farnell, UK website :
>> "Following the successful launch of Raspberry Pi Board B we've seen
>> unprecedented levels of interest in this product. Stocks from
>> Raspberry Pi of the initial production quantity are limited and these
>> have already sold out."
>> This doesn't sound like vapourware to me...
> 
> I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.  There have
> been any number of cheap arm boards in the past.  The rpi doesn't
> seem to bring any technical breakthroughs.  Has nobody already put
> approx the same straightforward combination of parts on a board,
> without the undocumented chips needing binary blobs?

At that price, no.  That's the point.

Andrew.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10159

On Mar 16, 9:46 am, Paul Rubin <no.em...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.  There have been
> any number of cheap arm boards in the past.

Not at this price-point, there hasn't. In terms of price, it's truly
revolutionary. I wish them success. They make a good point about
woeful computer education in British schools. It would be nice if the
government could get behind them and re-vamp computer education in
this country.

I have fond memories of my school from 1983-1986. Thinking back, we
were very well equipped. Two rooms of BBC B's, an old PET, a ZX
Spectrum (on a TV!) and a C64. The Beebs were all decked out with disk
drives and CUB monitors.

Those of us that showed an interest were very much encouraged to
tinker with the computers, writing programs etc during 'play-times',
during lunch breaks, and at 'computer club' after school, which ran
from 3.30pm to 5.30pm.

What great folks are teachers were!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10161

 > I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though. There have
 > been any number of cheap arm boards in the past.
 > The rpi doesn't seem to bring any technical breakthroughs.

Keep in mind that the RPi isn't just for the soldering-iron crowd.

 > Has nobody already put approx the same straightforward combination of
 > parts on a board, without the undocumented chips needing binary
 > blobs?

One of those parts would have to be a video subsystem..

-- 
Chris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10162

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
> > From the Farnell, UK website :
> > "Following the successful launch of Raspberry Pi Board B we've seen
> > unprecedented levels of interest in this product. Stocks from
> > Raspberry Pi of the initial production quantity are limited and these
> > have already sold out."

Fine point: they have been sold but not delivered.

> > This doesn't sound like vapourware to me...

In light of the fact they said "whoops, we have a bit of a problem and we
can't ship anything" it should sound like vapourware because until they *do*
start shipping *something* that's exactly what it is.

> I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.  There have been
> any number of cheap arm boards in the past.  The rpi doesn't seem to
> bring any technical breakthroughs.  Has nobody already put approx the
> same straightforward combination of parts on a board, without the
> undocumented chips needing binary blobs?  

The Pi also has binary blobs. And it hasn't shipped.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10163

On Mar 16, 5:46 am, Paul Rubin <no.em...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> I do have to wonder what all the hype is about though.
> There have been any number of cheap arm boards in the
> past.  The rpi doesn't seem to bring any technical
> breakthroughs.  Has nobody already put approx the
> same straightforward combination of parts on a board,
> without the undocumented chips needing binary blobs?

Please name the "cheap ARM board" that has /all/ the following...

1.  Reasonably fast processor (700MHz)
2.  256M of RAM
3.  Boots off and saves to standard high-capacity SD cards.
4.  In the "model B" has built-in Ethernet.
5.  Runs standard (not crippled) Linux distributions.
6.  Uses standard USB keyboards and mice.
7.  Supports audio in and audio out.
8.  Has high-quality (both resolution and color depth) video.
9.  Drives modern digital monitors or composite TV sets.
10.  Expandable by USB.
11.  Runs standard apps like OpenOffice, FireFox, etc.
12.  Has GPIO pins.

...for $35.  Or to put it in real world dollars, for less than about
$50, you can have a computer, keyboard, mouse, and 8G of flash that
isn't the fastest machine on the planet, but is plenty fast and plenty
capable for most real-world tasks.  Not every product needs to be a
technological breakthrough.  Sometimes, it's enough just to be both
useful and affordable.  I can easily see how this would help a lower-
income family.  But even for those who are more fortunate, I can also
see this as a fine board to replace the old Apple TV box on my big-ass
TV, or by slapping it in a box and throwing on old computer parts we
have lying around in the basement, a Internet terminal in our
kitchen.  $35?  I paid nearly that for a "Netduino" board with a 72MHz
ARM with a tiny amount of available RAM to run the logic for a
Christmas gift I made last year.  I was going to buy another one for a
project to replace the thermostat in our house with something more
intelligent, but why bother?  I can wire up the sensors and controls
to the GPIO on the Raspberry Pi and have a much more capable system.

All the Raspberry Pi people did technologically was take a very
capable SoC from Broadcom, slap it on a board, make some reasonable
trade-offs, and market the potential.  Yeah, I get tired of marketing
fluff and hype, but the question isn't if you or I or pretty much
everyone else here who can afford far better would be happy with the
Raspberry Pi.  The question is if this is a system that can give lower-
income people better access, if it's reasonable enough to help
revitalize IT curriculum in UK schools, and if it's open enough to
allow people to extend it in useful and interesting ways.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10170

John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> writes:
> ...for $35.  Or to put it in real world dollars, for less than about
> $50, you can have a computer, keyboard, mouse, and 8G of flash that
> isn't the fastest machine on the planet, but is plenty fast and plenty
> capable for most real-world tasks.

What real world tasks are you going to do with a computer, keyboard,
mouse, 8G of flash, but no screen?  Do you mean use the family TV set?
You really have to include that in the cost then, since it repurposes a
multi-user device into a single-user device, so Jimmy can't do his
homework while Mom and Dad watch the evening news, etc.  Or for that
matter, Jimmy and Johnny (with separate rpis) can't both do their
homework at the same time.  And aren't you also going to need a case and
power supply?

If you include the cost of the screen, you're now in the range of
Android tablets (some of them under $100) which can also serve as
e-books, or there could be an OLPC revival that actually hits the XO-1's
original $100 cost target this time.

> Not every product needs to be a technological breakthrough.
> Sometimes, it's enough just to be both useful and affordable.  I can
> easily see how this would help a lower- income family.

Sure, my question is just, if this thing is so great, what (if any) is
the obstacle to doing a more open one?  Is it that there's no comparable
alternative to the Broadcom SOC?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10171

On Friday, March 16, 2012 5:03:44 PM UTC-3, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Sure, my question is just, if this thing is so great, what (if any) is
> the obstacle to doing a more open one?  Is it that there's no comparable
> alternative to the Broadcom SOC?

It is a very reasonable question, just like asking what is so special about the Arduino and why don't people do better versions of it? There actually are similar efforts, like http://rhombus-tech.net/

But at any given moment, there is room for at most one project or product to capture the public's imagination. The OLPC was it for educational laptops back in 2005-2007, the Arduino for microcontroller kits for the past few years, the iPad (though several companies had shown essentially equivalent products at CES a couple of weeks before the 2010 announcement) and so on.

Right now, the Raspberry Pi has taken "the world's cheapest computer" spot. It is a pity that the iTV failed to do this in the 1990s when it would have been even more impressive. Note how much of an impact the Commodore VIC-20 and the Sinclair ZX-81 had when they help this title.

One detail is that even the Broadcom SOC wouldn't be an option except for the special deal that Raspberry Pi was able to get as due to a founder being an employee. Some random developer wouldn't have been able to pull it off. Nor would he have been able to get the time of day from Marvell and perhaps not from Texas Instruments either. He would have better luck with NXP and Freescale, but their chips are a bit more expensive.

-- Jecel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10176

Jecel <jecel@merlintec.com> writes:
>> Sure, my question is just, if this thing is so great, what (if any) is
>> the obstacle to doing a more open one?  Is it that there's no comparable
>> alternative to the Broadcom SOC?
>
> It is a very reasonable question, just like asking what is so special
> about the Arduino and why don't people do better versions of it? There
> actually are similar efforts, like http://rhombus-tech.net/

The arduino isn't especially closed afaik.  It just uses a hw/sw
ecosystem that (like anything else) is less attractive to some people
than others, and it is on the expensive side for what it does.

> One detail is that even the Broadcom SOC wouldn't be an option except
> for the special deal that Raspberry Pi was able to get as due to a
> founder being an employee. Some random developer wouldn't have been
> able to pull it off. Nor would he have been able to get the time of
> day from Marvell and perhaps not from Texas Instruments either. 

Why would he need special attention from Marvell or TI if they have
comparably priced parts?  Why was a special deal needed even from
Broadcom, instead or just ordering the parts the usual way, given the
quantities involved?  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web