Re: Mini-ITX PC's a the future of HA (was Re: X-10 Mister House Motion sensor problems)

[Marc F Hult <MFHult@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 23:46:30 -0400, "Robert Green"
<ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
<H5SdneP4M_pqBRbZnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@xxxxxxx>:

>
>That's exactly what I was discussing somewhat earlier.  And it's why I am
>so enamored of the mini-ITX.

"Enamored". . So the affinity goes beyond the rational. That's fine. No
permission needed. We all have preferences.

>Via's designed it and they've been building this stuff for years.  Lots of
>people are using them as servers and reporting
>phenomenally long "up" times.  They have, from what my hands *and* my eyes
>tell me, have come up with a machine that "fails to fail."  As a chip
>maker, they're in a unique position of knowing how to design every inch of
>a motherboard.

No. VIA is not in a unique position. Intel and AMD and IBM are also in this
position. (The word "unique" has a meaning in English.)  Here's an AMD
(geode) mini-ITX footprint fanless board:

http://www.epiacenter.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=88

"Fails to fail"?  I have three VIA mini-ITX's. One, for reasons I don't yet
know, fails to boot. Brand new.

Bobby writes about "it" --the mini-ITX -- but it would be helpful for others
to understand that the only "it" is a set of dimensions that define the
width and length of the board (but not its height) and the location of the
mounting screws, I/O panel (but not layout) and maybe slot. That's "it".
There is no electrical specification.

At this point even VIA has made a least a dozen _different_ boards using
different chips sets, different CPU's, different ethernet, different video
and so on. Many of the boards  are available in different variants.  There
is no standard feature list and there is no standard I/O connector. There
are at least five variants of the latter. The consistent characteristics of
VIA's offerings are that they all use VIA CPU's and principal chip sets.

In the most compact implementation, computers based on the mini-ITX
footprint don't use the PCI card slot (configuration #1).  Mini-ITX has one
vertical slot so unless modified, an PCI card sticks vertically straight up
(configuration #2. There are slot extenders that #3) place one board above
the MB, #4) two boards above the mother board, #5) one board next to the
mother board, #6) two boards next to the mother board, Each of these six
different configuration corresponds to a different optimal case shape and
size.

So unlike PC-XT through micro-ATX where the MB footprint also defined the
principal characteristics of the slots and case, you need *six* _different_
cases to optimally enclose the six different mini-ITX configurations. (So
much for reduced variability


The single most standardized compact case configuration in IT,
instrumentation and automation (1U rack)  can handle micro-ATX, mini-ITX and
nano-ITX. Unless there is new PCI slot extender I don't know about, all
allow only one PCI card (I'd like to see variant #7 appear -one top, one
side) . So much for the need and advantage of the mini-ITX in standard
racks.

(FWIW, the I/O configuration of Homeseer's box does not appear to match any
of VIA's I/O configurations, so the Homeseer box may very well use one of
the many other manufacturers of small mother boards --not VIA and maybe not
even mini-ITX. I dunno.) So ironically, if you want 2 PCI cards in a 1U rack
case, you have to use the larger micro-ATX with 2 horizontal extenders, not
mini-ITX MB.


Add to this reality  that just there were many manufacturers of the PC-XT
and PC-AT and ATX and micro-ATX form factors, there are currently many
manufacturers of mini-ITX boards using CPU's from AMD/Geode,
Pentium 4, Pentium M, Celeron/socket 370, and Intel dual core

http://www.ibase-usa.com/mb899.htm
http://www.epiacenter.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=39
http://www.bvm-store.com/ProductCategory.asp?fdSubCategoryId=13

And main chip sets from Intel, AMD, ATI, VIA and perhaps others.

And video and ethernet and other peripherals from around the globe. What's
more, they are available with PCI, mini-PCI, PCI-E and mini-PCI-E slots-- so
much for consistent expansion!

The permutations and variations are very large. So the notion that the
"mini-ITX" -- VIA or others --- is somehow bug-free because the
configuration has been so thoroughly tested through time is just that in my
opinion -- a notion.

>Intel dropped the ball on CPUs for a while.  They didn't realize that most
>people didn't want their laps burned and the tiny fans in their PC's to
>fill with dust and fail.  But that's what Intel delivered, fixated on
>speed, speed and more speed.

Intel's position as the world's biggest chip maker places it in a (yes)
unique position to do the R&D needed to reduce power consumption.
http://www.intel.com/technology/eep/index.htm

>Via ate its lunch by delivering what customers really wanted.

In total sales and value, VIA picked some crumbs up off the floor.

>Reliability, low purchase price and low operating costs.

Reliability? FWIW, the most squirrely, infuriating, post 80386 PC's I've
used have been VIA's. I avoided VIA like the plague for years.

Low(er) purchase price?  Not in my experience.

>Hold a Via mini-ITX motherboard in your hands and you'll know you are
>holding a technological miracle.

I felt that way when I first used  Ampro Little Boards in 1989 ;-)  Course
then the favorite American ox to gore was IBM, not Intel and the overseas
innovator was NEC. (NEC, oh NEC, where art thou now? )

If history repeats itself, Intel's consolidated media chip sets may make the
current multi-chip melange ( including VIA's) look like a home-brew
Frankenstein every bit as quaint and cuddly as the 1987 Ampro Little Board.

Whether the motherboard foot-print is 24cm x 24cm (micro-ATX),  17x17cm
(mini-ITX), 12 cm x 12cm (nano-ITX) or something else won't matter at all
(in my opinion).


... Marc
Marc_F_Hult
www.ECOntrol.org