Yokemate of Keyboards
Posts: 11974 from 2003/5/22
> The original Pegasos fell foul of a northbridge with cache coherency bugs
> and the fix was expensive and hammered the system's speed.
Fully correct, the fix of the bugs came at a cost.
> The original AmigaONEs did not fix the issue and much of the board's
> functionality was replaced by extra cards to avoid triggering them.
> The hardware had unadvertised bugs.
Exactly. In contrast to almost all other PPC hardware of the past 20 years, the Eyetech AmigaOnes were overly buggy.
> The Efika was almost useless for desktop because it's SoC had
> never been designed for it.
The whole board had never been designed for it. In my opinion, even more restricting than the low CPU performance was the laughable amount of RAM, although the SoC could handle at least twice the amount (which would still have been poor).
> The hardware was insufficient for intended use.
Intended use according to Genesi
: "embedded, thin client, industrial applications [...]. Example product solutions include: Thin-Client for X or Windows Terminal Server (rdesktop) displays; Home Theater satellite, to relay recorded or downloaded TV shows and movies around the home; High power-use/performance-ratio cluster node; Industrial control and robotics; VOIP/Video Phone connected to a TV; Webcam Security solution
> the Marvell just wasn't as advanced as the Articia.
The Marvell had a GbE controller and could handle DDR RAM while the Articia was stuck at SDR RAM :-)
> The hardware was limited.
Yes, biggest problem in my opinion was that it took the Peg2 until the last board revision to remove the 1 GiB RAM limit.
> every time the board is finalised, some component or another is no longer available
The Tabor had been finalized for years. It was only when OS4 for the board (not the board itself) was recently finalized by Hyperion, A-Eon realized that some (unspecified) component(s) was/were no longer available in the quantities required for production run so had to be replaced, which in turn required a board redesign to unspecified extent.
> PowerPC, as a direction for MorphOS, failed because of these reasons:
> price, availability, power and robustness
Can you elaborate on the "robustness" part of that statement?