[HN Gopher] Balthazar Personal Computing Device, a 13" RISC-V la...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Balthazar Personal Computing Device, a 13" RISC-V laptop
        
       Author : SamWhited
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2021-02-05 19:50 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (balthazar.space)
 (TXT) w3m dump (balthazar.space)
        
       | xiphias2 wrote:
       | I'd happily buy a RISC-V laptop, but I think it's too early,
       | mobile phones and servers will come first. Also the artist
       | rendering is ugly, I would expect an ultra-light laptop from a
       | low power architecture.
       | 
       | I want to see how it competes with Apple's M1 processor in speed
       | (especially that the web page writes that it's a fast laptop) and
       | power utilization.
        
         | duskwuff wrote:
         | > I want to see how it competes with Apple's M1 processor in
         | speed (especially that the web page writes that it's a fast
         | laptop)
         | 
         | That's a goal, not a specification. The project hasn't chosen a
         | processor. They aren't even sure it'll be RISC-V.
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | I think risc-v might work best as a server
         | 
         | For phone/desktop/laptop a rough spot would be the GPU. And
         | possibly perf/watt.
         | 
         | The M1 meanwhile most likely has billions of dollars of
         | development behind it.
        
           | xiphias2 wrote:
           | I don't see why RISC-V couldn't have billions of dollars
           | behind it in 10-20 years.
           | 
           | For Chinese phones I don't see any better architecture right
           | now, as they can't depend on ARM forever, it's too risky for
           | them.
        
             | wk_end wrote:
             | Isn't China pretty heavily invested into MIPS with the
             | Loongson? Is there any good reason for them to drop that
             | for RISC-V?
        
               | xiphias2 wrote:
               | RISC-V has a huge effort behind it to run all available
               | open source software. Even though there's a MIPS Android
               | port, it just doesn't have the amount of backing that
               | RISC-V is getting from hundreds of companies (basically
               | all big companies)
        
               | spijdar wrote:
               | I'd expect less activity around the MIPS port because it
               | is, by and large, already fully functional and a first
               | class citizen of Android, while RISC-V is still being
               | fully bootstrapped.
               | 
               | Further, software like Chrome/Chromium and V8 already
               | have functioning MIPS ports, which will be (a lot of)
               | additional work not currently being performed for RISC-V.
               | 
               | Compared to RISC-V, almost everything in the Linux
               | ecosystem should already "just work" on MIPS. I think
               | it's fair to ask why there wouldn't be more development
               | of MIPS, which is effectively a Chinese owned ISA at this
               | point, since it's more mature than RISC-V, if not as
               | "exciting".
        
               | xiphias2 wrote:
               | To quote Elon Musk: ,,The most entertaining outcome is
               | the most likely''.
               | 
               | I see just the opposite when I look around Reddit: MIPS
               | is dying. Google Play services is not updated on it, and
               | I don't see why people would port new games on it.
               | 
               | You need neural networks running efficiently to run all
               | the face swap algorithms (V in RISC-V was for vector
               | support originally), GPUs supported (again a RISC-V GPU
               | ISA extension is in development), JIT acceleration (J
               | extension). If it's not exciting for developers, it won't
               | win for consumer devices.
        
       | 1MachineElf wrote:
       | >For all children 9-99
        
       | petee wrote:
       | It's worth pointing out that this is a NLNet Foundation funded
       | project; they seem to back useful projects, from the ones I've
       | seen personally
        
       | duskwuff wrote:
       | In case it wasn't clear to anyone: this is a product _very_ early
       | in the planning phase, to the extent that many of the features
       | are unspecified (no processor has been chosen, they aren 't even
       | certain on whether it'll be RISC-V or ARM), underspecified to the
       | point of being unintelligible ("detachable USB gender-changer
       | dongle"), or outright ridiculous (SSH-based communications
       | between the keyboard and CPU).
       | 
       | I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a product here. This does
       | not have the smell of success on it.
        
         | ianai wrote:
         | Like seriously what would an ssh client running on the keyboard
         | even achieve? Maybe they're thinking of encrypting it. But
         | keyloggers running at the OS level don't care. Or is this to
         | force people to only use their keyboards? Or maybe it'll just
         | add a billion to their SPAC buyout.
        
           | swiley wrote:
           | I guess you could have a wireless keyboard without some of
           | the bluetooth security issues?
        
             | codys wrote:
             | SSH would not be the way to accomplish that.
        
         | striking wrote:
         | For anyone else who wants to take a peek for themselves at the
         | concerns raised in this comment:
         | https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...
         | 
         | Another thing that doesn't seem to line up with reality is the
         | idea that they might convince Nvidia to make their stuff FOSS
         | enough to be included in this project.
        
         | NovemberWhiskey wrote:
         | Yeah - clicked on this expecting to see vaporware; was not
         | disappointed.
        
         | arduinomancer wrote:
         | There's gotta be some reasoning behind those but when you put
         | it that way it sounds like some hilarious marketing speak.
         | 
         | "We're putting blockchain technology in the trackpad"
         | 
         | "Machine learning in the power button"
        
         | CameronNemo wrote:
         | I assumed that when I read the words riscv and laptop, but then
         | I saw nlnet was backing the project. I wonder what they are
         | hoping to get out of the project.
        
           | Hyp3rion wrote:
           | > While being versatile and robust it also follows CERN OSHL,
           | GNU-GPL, FOSS, EOMA, ISA and even CC guidelines
           | 
           | This is almost the most concerning part. They're treating
           | FOSS like it's some kind of standard. It's not. FOSS just
           | means software that is free and open source. Something is, or
           | isn't FOSS. You don't follow some standard to deliver a FOSS
           | product.
        
       | philipkglass wrote:
       | It's getting hugged to death.
       | 
       | Mirror:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20210205204013/https://balthazar...
       | 
       | Can it possibly be be used with Libreboot? It would be nice to
       | have some newly manufactured hardware in laptop form that
       | Libreboot can use.
        
         | duskwuff wrote:
         | > Can it possibly be be used with Libreboot?
         | 
         | No. Libreboot lacks support for any of the hardware under
         | consideration by this project.
         | 
         | Libreboot is essentially a dead project. It only supports a
         | limited number of Penryn-era (roughly 2007-2010) Intel laptops,
         | and -- strangely -- the RK3288C-based Chromebook C210.
        
         | CameronNemo wrote:
         | Can libreboot target any ARM SoCs? It seems like u-boot with a
         | verified boot path is not a common configuration, while the
         | coreboot ecosystem has a number of security oriented payloads.
        
           | philipkglass wrote:
           | The Libreboot wiki lists one ARM based system as supported, a
           | particular Chromeboook:
           | 
           | https://libreboot.org/docs/hardware/c201.html
        
             | spijdar wrote:
             | I think it's fair to point out libreboot is a fork off
             | coreboot, and while libreboot is basically a dead project
             | at this point, coreboot development continues. Chromebooks
             | tend to use coreboot natively, and on some chromebooks, you
             | can recompile and reflash coreboot, sometimes with no
             | binary blobs.
             | 
             | Google makes this (reflashing the firmware) surprisingly
             | easy in many cases, although there are often many caveats
             | to running linux/alternative firmware on chromebooks, to
             | the point it's kind of hard to recommend buying one for
             | this purpose.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-02-05 23:00 UTC)