Is an Open Notebook Chassis standard realistically possible?

[StrangerGuy]

I heard finding GPU modules for existing laptops is already a nightmare to begin with (MXM doesn't even guarantee compatibility other than size AFAIK), let alone implementing a successful open standard laptop form factor.

 

[taltamir]

open notebook chasis standards are grossly impractical.
those desktop standards work thanks to a desktop box being mostly empty air. A notebook needs to be as small and light as possible, which means each one being designed specifically and non interchangeably.

 

[cbn]

open notebook chasis standards are grossly impractical.
A notebook needs to be as small and light as possible, which means each one being designed specifically and non interchangeably.

This has been true in the past and also appears to be true to a great extent in the present.

I am just skeptical of how much the largest laptop manufacturers will be able to leverage their proprietary designs in the future. Once the ultra portables hit 10 hours with reasonable hardware aren't we splitting hairs after that?

 

[vbuggy]

This has been true in the past and also appears to be true to a great extent in the present.

I am just skeptical of how much the largest laptop manufacturers will be able to leverage their proprietary designs in the future. Once the ultra portables hit 10 hours with reasonable hardware aren't we splitting hairs after that?

When typing stuff like that, it's always a good idea to remember MS DOS and 640K.

 

[taltamir]

This has been true in the past and also appears to be true to a great extent in the present.

I am just skeptical of how much the largest laptop manufacturers will be able to leverage their proprietary designs in the future. Once the ultra portables hit 10 hours with reasonable hardware aren't we splitting hairs after that?

not really... if given the choice between a 2lbs 15 hour laptop and a 3lbs 10 hour one I Would choose the 2lbs 15 hour one in a snap.

 

[cbn]

not really... if given the choice between a 2lbs 15 hour laptop and a 3lbs 10 hour one I Would choose the 2lbs 15 hour one in a snap.

http://www.apple.com/macbookair/features.html

How about 30 days of standby coupled to "Instant On" using current technology found in the new Mac Book Air:

EDIT: I probably got over enthusiastic about the 30 day standby claim made by apple with their latest Mac Book Air release. I am just a person trying to learn about computer hardware (so I make mistakes constantly). However it does look like they made a decent jump in battery life from 5 hours to 7 hours for the 13.3" ultra portable chassis (according to their recent claims here).

All-Flash Storage.
Instant-on gratification.

If you have an iPod, iPhone, or iPad, you’re already taking advantage of all that flash storage has to offer: reliability, speed, and efficiency. So the decision to use flash storage in an ultracompact notebook like MacBook Air makes perfect sense. Flash allows you to access data quickly, and it gives MacBook Air the astonishing ability to remain in standby mode for up to 30 days.1 Which means your MacBook Air snaps to in an instant, whether you open it tomorrow, next week, or next month.

 

[taltamir]

http://www.apple.com/macbookair/features.html

How about 30 days of standby coupled to "Instant On" using current technology found in the new Mac Book Air:

I don't understand what your point is. and "standby" time is totally irrelevant. its a total waste of battery to use standby on a laptop. Either use it, or shut it down (or hibernate), standby just drains your battery.

 

[cbn]

I don't understand what your point is. and "standby" time is totally irrelevant. its a total waste of battery to use standby on a laptop. Either use it, or shut it down (or hibernate), standby just drains your battery.

I'll have to wait for the reviews, but I was thinking Apple's new Standby might allow some people to increase their battery life. (depending on how many breaks and phone calls they make during the time the Mac Book Air is powered on).

 

[taltamir]

I'll have to wait for the reviews, but I was thinking Apple's new Standby might allow some people to increase their battery life. (depending on how many breaks and phone calls they make during the time the Mac Book Air is powered on).

this still doesn't explain your point. what does better battery from macbook have to do with ourr discussion?

and what is new about standby? sounds like apple advertising something that has been around for decades (sleep mode)

 

[cbn]

this still doesn't explain your point. what does better battery from macbook have to do with ourr discussion?

I used Apple as an example because I thought they achieved a great performance metric. (despite using yesterday's 45nm Core 2 duo clocked at a healthy 1.86 Ghz along with a discrete Nvidia GPU.)

With Intel 22nm dual core SOC right around corner I can't imagine Windows 10 hour ultra portables being that far away. Once that happens, my guess is that *most* people's needs would be fulfilled. At that point the incentive for large notebook companies to spend high amounts of money on the most cutting edge proprietary designs **might** start to diminish. (ie, the remaining market for proprietary could become more and more niche with every passing year).

But what does this mean for us as consumers? I am not exactly sure, but maybe the traditional DIY companies will see this as an opportunity to migrate to mobile? (especially if building proprietary for certain notebook segments eventually proves less profitable for the established laptop makers)

 

[taltamir]

I see, you basically think we will reach a point where people will say "this is light enough/small enough/long enough battery"
I disagree. There is always room for improvement. a few people might be satisfied with one metric or another, but those are multiple distinct metrics.
even if we all had .2 inch thick laptops that weighed 1 lbs and laster 10 hours... well, why not a .1 inch thick laptop? or weighing .5 lbs? or 20 hours battery?
Charging is a PITA, I want to do it as rarely as possible...
if you manage to get significant enough battery, then you can ditch the charger at home, at which case you carry a lot less weight (and volume) with you when traveling... but the battery lifetime matters more. If batter lifetime is 10 days of active use, I could leave the charger at home if I am going on a 2 day trip. But what of a 7 day trip? do I dare?
And lighter is always better, so is thinner. The macbook air is very thin at its thinnest point, but somewhat fat at its fattest. I am sure apple would love to make it thinner.

 

[cbn]

I see, you basically think we will reach a point where people will say "this is light enough/small enough/long enough battery"
I disagree. There is always room for improvement. a few people might be satisfied with one metric or another, but those are multiple distinct metrics.
even if we all had .2 inch thick laptops that weighed 1 lbs and laster 10 hours... well, why not a .1 inch thick laptop? or weighing .5 lbs? or 20 hours battery?
Charging is a PITA, I want to do it as rarely as possible...
if you manage to get significant enough battery, then you can ditch the charger at home, at which case you carry a lot less weight (and volume) with you when traveling... but the battery lifetime matters more. If batter lifetime is 10 days of active use, I could leave the charger at home if I am going on a 2 day trip. But what of a 7 day trip? do I dare?
And lighter is always better, so is thinner. The macbook air is very thin at its thinnest point, but somewhat fat at its fattest. I am sure apple would love to make it thinner.

Taltamir you definitely know more about IT than me, but wouldn't these more extreme ultra thin laptops you are talking about:

1. Possibly be difficult to type on (ie, flexy keyboard)?
2. Compete too much with Tablets and/or ARM based designs? (ie, MacBook Air overlapping too much with iPad).

As far as laptops with days of active battery life go, I am sure some people would really love that.....but how many of those same people would be willing to pay the price premium for such a proprietary design?

This begs the question in my mind, "Where is x86 mobile really headed?" (especially in light of Best Buy claiming iPad is catabolizing some of its laptop sales). Opinions?

 

[taltamir]

to address the issues you raise:
1. I haven't really had a problem with it myself, but since a lot of people do I assume some solution would have to be found for flexy keyboards, I am assuming just some extra bracing (which adds weight... good thing we are cutting weight elsewhere )
2. why is that a problem? we are talking about a hypothetical 2020 device that packs the power of a laptop in a much smaller package. rather then leave lots of empty space to allow for people to assemble their own, people will opt for having it in even thinner and lighter.
Personally I think the folding monitor above keyboard design is too robust to replace any time soon.

Right now, today, you can purchase build your own laptops, for example the OCZ DIY laptops. They are bigger and bulkier then competing products.
I actually own a behemoth of a laptop (9lbs, with 2.5lbs power brick) with a full sized socket 939, it came with the first gen AMD64 CPU and I have since replaced it to the latest gen one it will take... I don't use it anymore, I use my ultra portable 13.3 inch 3.9lbs nehalem lappy... I tried a netbook before that (from costco, returned it), I wish I could mix the lightness of the netbook with the power of my nehalem lappy.

anyways, I went on a tangent. Point is, people might start craving "build it yourself laptops", but I don't see why. They have always been available and have always been heavier and bulkier, and people always seemed to prefer a custom designed prebuilt one, maybe it will change when it gets small and light enough, I do not know. I am merely guessing that it will not.

This begs the question in my mind, "Where is x86 mobile really headed?" (especially in light of Best Buy claiming iPad is catabolizing some of its laptop sales). Opinions?

Cannibalizing not catabolizing... and anyways, new products with some overlap always cannibalize at least some existing market share (alongside the new customers they bring), the iPad isn't going to grow forever and it isn't going to take over anytime soon.

The theory is that in 30 years you will used a flexible OLED rolled into two tubes, the tubes will be cell phone sized and contain a full computer. When you pull them out an OLED screen with roll out, it will have touch capability too, so it can do a virtual keyboard.
its entirely feasible to build such a device (heck, should be build-able in 15 years) and its not unreasonable to assume at least some people will use it. it is really hard to predict how such a thing will go over, who knows what we will be doing in a few decades. anyways, the ability to roll a monitor means you can have very small (and light) devices with large screens and makes for interesting progression in the type we discussed before.

 

[cbn]

people always seemed to prefer a custom designed prebuilt one

I know this has been true in the past, but could we see Intel releasing unlocked multipliers for mobile? (At the level of Sandy Bridge and beyond)

My very basic understanding is that unlocked multipliers go a long way towards promoting simplicity in various aspects of design. Perhaps this is what the DIY industry needs in order to help them promote overclocking with these small laptop boards (provided sufficient cooling is available to the VRMs and processor)? Certainly it appears the CPU silicon itself would be capable of higher speeds for better single threaded performance. (I have been under the impression for the last year mobile processors are nothing more than "binned" desktop silicon).

 

[taltamir]

i don't know. Nobody can predict the future, only make educated guesses. Maybe it will, maybe it wont.

 

[Bl0cks]

A little late to chime in here, but I think it will come down to cost. My point is, you can spend $150-$200 on an Intel mobile cpu upgrade, or put that money towards a new sub-$300 laptop, or a desktop quad core. You will have to look at building desktops and ask, is it worth upgrading, and apply that to a laptop. For example: what are you going to get if you change out the mobo? Maybe a different onboard GPU, DDR2->DDR3 (and so on), different cooling, wifi and bluetooth, and more usb ports.

I think it will also come down if the pre-built desktop market will stick around, I don't know how well that sector is doing. If a significant amount of people are putting their pc's together, they may say "hmm, I want to put a laptop together now." This scenario seems unlikely though.

 

[cbn]

I think it will also come down if the pre-built desktop market will stick around, I don't know how well that sector is doing. If a significant amount of people are putting their pc's together, they may say "hmm, I want to put a laptop together now." This scenario seems unlikely though.

I think the major draw for building DIY is overclocking. As long as that stays alive in the ATX market I think we will continue to see component sales.

A lot of people see good savings in that type of strategy compared to buying a pre-built with a higher priced CPU.

With that being said I think we need to see the same thing happen in laptops. A cheaper and standardized laptop needs to be able to hit frequencies beyond what a more expensive laptop attains. (Of course I still like the idea of being able to reuse chassis and Laptop screen, but I don't think that will be enough to draw first time builders into buying standardized machines)

 

[cbn]

I heard finding GPU modules for existing laptops is already a nightmare to begin with (MXM doesn't even guarantee compatibility other than size AFAIK), let alone implementing a successful open standard laptop form factor.

I'm not sure what to say about that?

We do have AMD Fusion and possibly external video cards to look forward to.

This begs the following question: How many people would prefer a lighter weight laptop plus external video card vs larger bulkier Laptop with a large dedicated MXM GPU/extra cooling built in? I am under the impression that some of these internal GPUs draw so much power that the manufacturer won't let the user enable them for mobile use. (Internal Discrete GPU will only work if the laptop is connected to AC power).

 

[0roo0roo]

there will always be innovation, you might as well ask for a standard smartphone chassis. these things are becoming more appliance like and less user customizable by the day. standard chassis has no meaning anymore for such things, just look at the mac book air... anyone who stuck with a chassis design would be stuck in the past

 

[cbn]

there will always be innovation, you might as well ask for a standard smartphone chassis. these things are becoming more appliance like and less user customizable by the day. standard chassis has no meaning anymore for such things, just look at the mac book air... anyone who stuck with a chassis design would be stuck in the past

Since I wrote this thread I have been thinking a little bit more about this topic.

Maybe **At some level** a "standardized interface" between two parts (either proprietary or open standard) would be more realistic and feasible?

For example, Why do heavy and bulky components in laptops (such as GPUs, coolers) that can only be used on AC power need to ride along with the Laptop when it is being used mobile?

Maybe the interface between the battery and the laptop chassis can be changed in such a way that other components can be plugged into that location when the laptop is "docked" (ie, connected to AC power with the battery removed).

 

[cbn]

http://www.crn.com/news/channel-pro...ek-2-to-debut-in-laptops-next-week.htm?pgno=1

Some more evidence "standardized notebook mainboard" has been tried before.

But why couldn't Intel make this work? Would overclocking have made the difference for small builders Intel was trying to help?

On 5/12/2010 AMD announced some Black Edition Champlain Processors (basically Propus) with unlocked multipliers, but it looks like nobody picked them up? Is this because overclocking on mobile form factor is plainly a bad idea? Or was this due to the fact that overvolted and overclocked Black edition Champlains were not competitive enough with Standard voltage stock clocked Arrandales?

Page 1 of 2

A group of notebooks powered by Intel (NSDQ:INTC)'s new Rich Creek 2 mobile motherboard, designed to give system builders' the muscle to go head to head against computer giants like Dell (NSDQell) in the notebook market, will be featured at next week's Intel Solutions Summit.

Seneca Data of Syracuse New York will be one of several system builder giants showing off preproduction of Rich Creek 2 platform notebooks at the partner conference, which starts Sunday in Las Vegas. System builders said Rich Creek 2 provides for the first time the same kind of Intel standard motherboard that powered huge growth in both the desktop and server markets for them. The new Rich Creek 2 based systems are slated to ship at the end of June or in early July. Seneca for its part is hoping to break the sub -$800 price point with a Rich Creek 2 business class system that carries a full three year warranty.

Seneca, in fact, plans to show a Rich Creek 2-based notebook at the Intel Solultions Summit powered by Intel's 2.5 Ghz Core 2 Duo processor, said Steve Maser, vice president of product development and marketing for Seneca. What's more, Seneca intends to raffle off at the show the first two Rich Creek 2 platform notebooks scheduled to come off the production line, said Maser. He said that full-fledged systems are slated to be manufactured at the end of the second quarter or early in the third quarter, said Maser.

The Rich Creek 2 platform marks the first time Intel has put its own reference design muscle behind a mobile motherboard that bears its own name. System builders predicted that Rich Creek 2 combined with standards-based enclosures, multiple options for displays and drives will for the first time give system builders the ability to deliver business class notebooks with more bang for the buck than computer makers like Hewlett Packard, Lenovo and Acer.

"Rich Creek 2 gives us the ability to build custom notebooks just like we do desktops," said Maser. "This is the first time that the system builder community has been able to build a notebook from the ground up that is 100 percent build to order. Now we can compete (against larger computer makers) and build exactly what the customer wants."

Next: A Defining Moment for System Builders

multi-year effort by Intel (NSDQ:INTC) to try to provide system builders with standards-based ingredients to compete more ferociously against giant computer manufacturers in the fast growing notebook segment.

"We are at a key defining moment where Intel is putting their muscle behind a (build to order notebook mobile motherboard)," said Maser. "I think we could see growth similar to what we experienced with the desktop in the mid-90s and servers in early 2000." He said the $160 million Seneca only captured three percent of its total sales from notebooks last year. That should shoot up to 7 percent of total sales by the end of this year as a result of Rich Creek 2, said Maser. "If we could get that to 20 percent of the business in three years we'd be in real good shape," he said.

Up until now, many system builders have opted to stay out of the custom notebook market because they lacked the standards-based ingredients to compete effectively against large computer makers. Many have complanied that there simply is not the same robust ecosystem to allow them to innovate against computer giants.

Maser, for his part, sees that changing with Rich Creek 2. He predicts that system builders will now be able to provide $800 to $1,000 business notebook with a three-year-warranty that packs more bang for the buck than those offered by larger players like Dell (NSDQell).

The serviceability benefits of the Rich Creek 2 mobile motherboard are "huge" for system builders, said Maser. "It's an Intel board," he said, noting it provides the flexibility that allows system builders to immediately swap out a board. That has not been the case with the current crop of motherboard options for whitebook builders. He said it could take days or even weeks to get a mother board replacement.

Maser said the system builder community needs to rise to the Rich Creek 2 occasion and start aggressively selling innovative, powerful business class notebooks rather than sub-$500 consumer class notebooks. "We need to sell our integration, service, support, installation, customization and value-added competence," he said. "We need to embrace that on the notebook side and not roll over and play dead. Don't automatically assume you can't compete!"

"The overall VAR community needs to go out and embrace these custom, build to order notebooks so we can own the entire business," said Maser.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

One of my exes roomates was an engineer for intel here in Hillsboro OR. At the time she was going to many asian companies to develop/adopt the standard FF that intel and a few other chipset MFers designed. She said everyone was not conforming over ever developing SFF laptop, which i now realize was netbooks.

I should have just stayed with her to discuss hardware with her roomate. This was in 07.

(iphone post)

 

[cbn]

One of my exes roomates was an engineer for intel here in Hillsboro OR. At the time she was going to many asian companies to develop/adopt the standard FF that intel and a few other chipset MFers designed. She said everyone was not conforming over ever developing SFF laptop, which i now realize was netbooks.

I should have just stayed with her to discuss hardware with her roomate. This was in 07.

(iphone post)

What you are saying is very interesting and I thank you for contributing that observation to my thread.

Perhaps once a certain volume exists the cost of manufacture drops so low that "standardized components" no longer offer additional value to the manufacturer?

But what about from the consumer's standpoint? Wouldn't it be cheaper in some cases for consumers to upgrade the laptop mainboard (featuring a higher performance die shrunk CPU/RAM) rather than the whole computer? What kind of technical obstacles exist blocking that from happening?

P.S. Here is another example of "standardized laptop mainboard" (this time by VIA)

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Via-spins-netbook-motherboard/

Via spins Netbook mainboard

Eschewing the netbook moniker popularized by its rival Intel, Via says the Surfboard will "reduce development time of affordable, power-efficient mini-notebooks." The board offers all the key ingredients of a portable computer, including real-world ports, a memory card reader, and even an integrated touchpad (apparently on the opposite side from the one pictured above), according to the company. Seemingly, all manufacturers will need to add is a display, a keyboard, a battery, and a case to wrap them all up in.

A key feature of the Surfboard touted by Via is the board's "flawless playback of high bit-rate 1080p HD video" -- something Intel's popular Atom N270 and 82945GSE northbridge are reportedly unable to provide. The enhanced video is courtesy of the recently announced VX855, a core-logic chip that combines northbridge and southbridge functionality, uses just 2.3 Watts, and measures only 27 x 27mm. According to Via, this chip permits decoding of H.264, MPEG-2, MPEG-4, and VC-1 video, while using only 40 percent of a host CPU's resources.


Dr. Mobile's FreeStyle 1300n
(Click image for further information)
The VX855 is designed to support Via's Eden, C7, and Nano processors. The relatively new, 64-bit Nano has just started to appear in netbooks, such as Samsung's NC20 and Dr. Mobile's FreeStyle 1300n (right), and we're a bit surprised not to see it in the Surfboard. Presumably for cost reasons, Via has instead selected its older C7-M ULV, which dates back to 2006. At the same time, with its in-order execution pipeline, the C7 is arguably more akin than the Nano to the Atom chips that have fared so well in the netbook space.

The 1.6GHz C7-M ULV used here has a maximum TDP of eight Watts, according to Via, bringing the Surfboard's overall power consumption to just over 10 Watts. Dwarfed by the VX855, as shown in the photos above and below, the C7-M ULV measures just 21 x 21mm, and is manufactured for Via by IBM using a 90nm process.

According to Via, the Surfboard supports internal display resolutions of up to 1366 x 768 pixels, while its VGA port supports external displays up to 1920 x 1440 pixels. Other real-world interfaces on the board include two USB ports, a 10/100 Ethernet jack, a microphone input, and a headphone output, the company says.


Via's Surfboard
(Click to enlarge)

As pictured above, the Surfboard has a single SODIMM socket, which accepts up to 2GB of DDR2 RAM. Also onboard are a "3 in 1" card reader, plus support for 1.8-inch PATA and 2.5-inch SATA HDDs (hard disk drives), says Via.

Via says the Surfboard can optionally include a 3G module, a 0.3 megapixel USB webcam, and, if more external USB ports are desired, a USB hub. The device also has two Mini Card slots, though the company says it has only used the USB part of the Mini Card interface, implying that PCI Express devices are not compatible.

Features and specifications listed by Via for the Surfboard include:

* Processor -- 1.6GHz Via C7-M ULV
* Memory -- Accepts up to 2GB of DDR2 RAM
* Display -- Supports internal LVDS displays up to 1366 x 768 pixels, and external displays up to 1920 x 1440 pixels
* Camera -- 0.3 megapixel webcam (optional)
* Touchpad, including left and right buttons
* Storage -- Supports 1.8-inch PATA or 2.5-inch SATA HDDs
* Networking -- 10/100 Ethernet
* Other I/O:
o VGA port
o 2 x USB
o DC input
o Mic in
o Headphone output
* Expansion:
o "3-in-1" card reader (presumably SD/MMC/Memory Stick)
o 2 x Mini Card slots
* Battery -- 24.4Wh version supports three-cell batteries; 48.8Wh version supports six-cell batteries
* Dimensions -- n/s, but designed to support netbooks with ten- or 12-inch screens

Availability

Via did not say when the Surfboard C855 Reference Design will show up in complete netbooks. More information on the Surfboard may be found on the company's website, here.

Via "surfboard" standardized Netbook mainboard

 

[taltamir]

its not a standard if it is only supported by one single company.

 

[cbn]

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20100705PD203.html

Taiwan notebook companies support PSU standardization

Yen-Shyang Hwang, Taipei; Willie Teng, DIGITIMES [Monday 5 July 2010]

Taiwan-based notebook companies have indicated that they are in favor for the standardization of power supply units (PSU) after the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) recently established a dedicated team for the initiative, sources from Taiwan's computer industry said.

Taiwan's brand vendors Acer, and Asustek Computer and manufacturers such as Quanta Computer, Compal Electronics, Wistron, Pegatron Technology and Inventec have voiced their support, according to the sources.

PSU standardization is still at an early stage and it will be quite some time before all the details are hammered out, said the sources, citing as an example the still undecided outcome of handset charger standardization, which began several years ago.

Supports from PSU makers will likely post major obstacles as their businesses are poised to suffer, the sources pointed out. If the initiative indeed becomes reality, it has significant ramifications on the power supply sector. With shipments expected to go down, higher margin and better PSUs are needed to offset the impact. Manufacturers producing smarter power supply solutions and making inroads into other product sectors would then probably be the trend for achieving success.

Under the initiative, IEEE hopes to lower e-waste by enabling one PSU for multiple mobile computing devices. It would eliminate the need to pay for a new PSU for each new notebook, tablet or netbook purchases, which would also be great news for consumers.