Slashdot Log In
Space Cube – the World's Smallest Linux PC
Posted by
timothy
on Wed Aug 27, 2008 08:47 AM
from the not-time-cube-note dept.
from the not-time-cube-note dept.
Barence writes "Meet the Space Cube — the world's smallest fully functional PC. Primarily designed for use in space, it somehow manages to cram a working PC with USB ports, card readers, audio outputs and proprietary interfaces into a tiny cube chassis measuring just two inches square. It runs a basic Linux front-end, which the blogger takes a look at, and there are some great photos of the device being loomed over by everyday objects like coffee mugs and cellphones. It has connections for controlling various electronics used by ESA, NASA and JAXA, but it will also apparently be for sale to the public soon, for use by amateur engineers and robotics clubs."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Smallest? (Score:5, Informative)
incorrect summary (Score:5, Informative)
The second line of the article states that it is one of the smallest computers in the world, not the smallest.
yp.
Parent
Re:Smallest? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe 2 years ago this might have been 'Wow!' - but with the likes of the Eee etc around - the appropriate response is 'Meh.'
Just some quick back of a fag packet calculation on the Eee put it at 9cm^3. Obviously, a lot more than this with its 5cm^3, but you do get
* a keyboard
* a screen
* 3 usb ports
* wireless ethernet
* mouse pad
* power
* loads more disk space
* 3 times the processor
* etc
all for 300 quid
Which if you got rid of would reduce the size right down to a lot less than 5cm^3.
No disrespect to the folks that put this thing together - and yes I would like one please - but... it's not rockin' my world.
Parent
Re:Smallest? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course not. And it also doesn't help that the Space Cube, unlike the eeePC, is totally useless by itself.
It's wonderful to have a tiny computer, but if you need to slap on a monitor, keyboard, and mouse to use it it's really not all that tiny, is it?
It also doesn't help that the real reason, in general (i.e., other than embedded computing environments) the reason people want small computers is portability, and this thing is hardly portable- sure, it's small and light, but given that it's totally useless on its own, that lack of size and weight is mostly irrelevant.
Even for use in space, I still think it's a waste of, well, space. Either you're going to connect it to a real computer for display and use (with that big monitor and keyboard) or you're not, and all those jacks are a waste of space.
Parent
Re:Smallest? (Score:4, Insightful)
Dont forget the power, the space cube requires a power source... while the eee does too long term, it can run for a length of time on it's battery.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Just some quick back of a fag packet calculation on the Eee put it at 9cm^3.
Isn't the Eee 22.5 cm x 16.5 cm x 3.5 cm? That looks like it comes out to almost 1300 cm^3. Even if my dimensions are wrong, I doubt your ability to fit a keyboard into 9cm without going to chording or something of that nature.
Re:Smallest? (Score:5, Funny)
Just some quick back of a fag packet calculation
Please don't tell us what you used as a writing utensil.
Parent
Re:Smallest? (Score:5, Funny)
. No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
And then you have the Jack PC [chippc.com] that fits into an ordinary wall outlet box. (Round type, not the rectangular type)
Re:Smallest? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Airport security (Score:4, Funny)
Would they let you pass with that in an airport?
Re:Airport security (Score:5, Funny)
Yes. Just paint it to look like this [thinkgeek.com].
Parent
Re:Airport security (Score:4, Insightful)
That'd be cool for far more than just airport security, I think that might just be the coolest casemod idea I've ever heard of.
Since a Rubik's cube is 3"x3"x3" [wikipedia.org], you could literally fit a shell that looked just like a standard Rubik's over it, and have removable squares for the ports....
The mind boggles at the coolness of that!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These things are perfect for use in MITM attacks.
Yes but... (Score:5, Funny)
does it run... oh... it does? Awsome.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Yes but... (Score:4, Funny)
Thanks for not letting us down.
Parent
How does a cube... (Score:5, Funny)
...measure two inches square?
Re:How does a cube... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:How does a cube... (Score:5, Informative)
Quite simply, it's one of the smallest PCs in the world, with each side measuring around 2 square inches.
*Emphasis mine
Parent
Re:How does a cube... (Score:4, Funny)
each side
As if "each side" of a cube needs to be specified. Journalism trumps geometry.
Parent
!2 inches square (Score:4, Informative)
Each edge is 55mm long, or 2.16". So each side is 4.67 square inches. All together it is 10.1 cubic inches, which would be the appropriate measurement for a cube.
-Rick
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
...measure two inches square?
Each face of the cube measures two inches square
I am Homer of Borg, prepare to be assim... mmmmm, donut!
I am a real cyborg [slashdot.org]. So is VP Dick Cheney. You will be assimilated. resistance is not only futile, when your time comes you will beg to join us.
Which is not even true (Score:5, Informative)
On http://www.pcpro.co.uk/blogs/2008/07/03/introducing-the-space-cube/ [pcpro.co.uk] (which is linked from the linked article) they mention that the thing is about 2x2x2 inches, so each side is about 4 square inches.
Parent
too bad it's not available (Score:4, Interesting)
Too bad it's not available to the general public at the moment :(
Re:too bad it's not available (Score:5, Informative)
Actually this stuff IS available to the general public.
It's called the PC-104 formfactor and it's been around for decades. Hell I got a 386 with A2D inputs and digital in and outs as well as VGA, CF interface and audio interface in the basement that is slightly larger than that that I used for wearable Computing in the early 90's.
It's not new or special. It's standard industrial PC gear repackaged and sold with a "Ooooooh space technology" marketing twist.
Parent
Another? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Another? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is enormously expensive to launch things into orbit. Making a smaller and lighter computer saves on launch costs, and the weight allowance can be used for other things. Then again, presumably you still have to launch a mouse and keyboard and VDU for this thing, so it's not quite as great a saving as it sounds...
Parent
Re:Another? (Score:5, Informative)
Then again, presumably you still have to launch a mouse and keyboard and VDU for this thing, so it's not quite as great a saving as it sounds...
Depends on its job. It could be a headless device for logging/collating/forwarding sensor data, controlling a robot, whatever.
Parent
Re:Another? (Score:5, Informative)
Not necessarily. You could (for example) have them control all kinds of things with no peripherals attached for most of the time (that is, except in the case when a problem needs to be diagnosed).
In case of a problem if there's need for diagnostics, you can then plug some small screen+keyboard and you're set to go.
They're running linux so they should be ideal for monitoring sensors and reporting, transmitting ping/heartbeat signals for any kinds of devices, for controlling hardware, basically for anything that can run autonomously.
Parent
Re:Another? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
What's the big deal with PC compatibility ? (Score:5, Insightful)
This thing is obviously aimed at special applications.
For these kind of things there are much better solutions than x86 chips. They are smaller, faster, cheaper and more economic than classic HW.
Take a look at TI's daVinci program, for example, or maybe some small Coldfire from Freescale or maybe some cool Arm from NXP etcetc.
Re:What's the big deal with PC compatibility ? (Score:4, Insightful)
I would think that the primary "big deal" would be programming talent.
Way back when, the government used proprietary, government-programmed operating systems and software for stuff, and it rarely worked and it was difficult to find programmers to maintain or update the software. This way, by using a processor that can run a well-known, well-liked, popular OS that has literally millions of enthusiastic programmers available, it shouldn't be difficult to get critical software written or maintained.
You also won't need to re-invent the wheel for common modules, and your programmers can therefore concentrate on the stuff that is unique to your application of the hardware.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apart from the inappropriate use of the 'PC' term, the article doesn't actually state what type of architecture the processor is.
This [dundee.ac.uk] far more interesting paper on it, states that it has a MIPS processor.
Radiation hardened? (Score:3, Interesting)
I appreciate that it's not meant for handling critical systems, but nevertheless, I wonder if its components are radiation hardened. In particular, what CPU has that thing got? Some sort of ARM?
And the RAM... is it SECDED?
PC Pro is clueless. (Score:5, Interesting)
Or, less dramatically, gumstix [slashdot.org].
The spacecube is cute, I admit, I'd be amused to have one; but the notion of it being the smallest is silly.
But can it run (Score:4, Funny)
the Gammima.AG worm? I hear that's popular in space nowadays
NOT a Linux PC. It's a little MIPS based system (Score:4, Informative)
This is Not a PC.
From the Manufacturer's web site, it runs a fairly standard MIPS SoC from NEC... a Vr5701. There is not x86 compatible CPU in there. Since it's MIPS, don't expect to just use RPM and install anything, and clearly it doesn't use RedHat. The OS might be derived from RedHat, but I suspect it's just bad journalism (everything Linux is RedHat, right?).
I'm not saying it's not cool, but it isn't a PC. And I think if you want a Space capable device, you'll have to deal with the radiation hardness yourself. www.gaisler.com has some perhaps more suitable chips that are rad hard (SPARC based).
Cubes from Space? (Score:4, Funny)
Imagine... (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine a beowulf cluster of these puppies! You might actually be able to run a GUI.
Re:Imagine... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
$300 - $1500 price jump?! (Score:4, Insightful)
The biggest problem is that they're selling it for US$300+ in Japan, but the University wants to sell it for $1500+
Another good idea dying on the vine caused by greed.
It makes sense! (Score:4, Funny)
Who'd a thunk that the Borg would have such humble beginnings?
I have to say, it does explain their relative ease of Assimilation...
Radhard? (Score:3, Insightful)
If this thing is meant to be going into space doesn't it need to be using radiation hardened components?
TFA states the cost is likely to be around GBP1500, that along with the size and specs of it makes me wonder if they're using commercial grade components in there. Aren't radiation hardened componentes generally around 10 years behind standard PC's? In other words is this thing actually going to be of any use in space or is is just some wierd marketing gimmick?
Wow (Score:3)
I have a new record minium time required for going from "not knowing something is available" to "wanting something badly."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dimensions, anybody? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Dimensions, anybody? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Not Space Cube (Score:4, Funny)
Dumbass, its a "Space Cube". It should be measured in the fourth dimension as 2 square inches/sec.
No, that would make it a "Time Cube" [timecube.com], and that would be a Bad Thing.
Parent