Yup. Seems like pointless, instant-gratification consumerism when server boxes are far faster, cheaper and greener. Worse, it's an un-upgradable device to buy and throw away. Anyone that needs more horsepower, it's far simpler to either trade up, use a real server or just use a cloud/VPS similar to AWS.
"server boxes are far faster, cheaper and greener. Worse, it's an un-upgradable device to buy and throw away."
How many of these devices would you have to buy and throw away to match the environmental material footprint of even one 1U rack-mount server? They're tiny. Orders of magnitude matter.
(Similar effect: However "disposable" USB flash drives may superficially seem, compared to the floppies they replaced they are nothing. And I do not just mean that the USB sticks can hold lots of stuff... I mean that if you pile a normal computer user of the 2015 era's USB sticks in one pile, and a normal computer user of the 1990 era's floppy disks into another pile, the floppies would tower over the entire pile of USB drives and almost certainly have a much larger environmental footprint. I hedge only for the possibility that the nasty flash memory might dominate the floppies manufacturing, but the floppies do irreducibly have an awful lot more plastic in them, so I'm still guessing the floppy pile comfortably "wins".)
Floppies are plastic and vinyl. Flash drives require an entire foundry worth of heavy metals and exotic compounds. I doubt it is the clear win you think.
The drive needs electronics as well, consuming possibly as much of heavy metals and exotic compounds. And you need a lot of floppies to be on par with capacity of a flash drive.
How many of these sticks, powered hubs and controlling computers would you have to buy to equal one green 1U server? On the order of 64 USB sticks, 15 powered hubs AND one computer... That's 15 cheap bricks and a computer's power supply that have to be made and suck down power versus a quality, high-efficiency switching PSU that is about ~98% efficient. Doing the math on the supply chain sourcing of each component is pointless, because it wouldn't be practical, and at present, it's impossible to source all materials from goods to actual, verified origin (not shady middlemen).
Also, how much power would be lost by all those cheap bricks compared to a single, efficient switching power supply?
It also would be 65 systems to maintain.
Renting a fraction (via cloud/VPS) of a green server (good PUE DCs and LP gear) is far cheaper and greener. But more importantly, waste fewer computing resources.
How does a cloud VM satisfy the 'intel stick' use-case? Where is the HDMI port?
Also, since you're piling on every possible thing you can to make your case, you should also include the power systems of every networking device between your cloud VM and you.
It's been too long since I built a PC so I'll take your word on the faster/cheaper argument, but greener? Can you really build a server box that uses less power than a 1-2A USB device?
>Can you really build a server box that uses less power than a 1-2A USB device?
Not sure, but I think the point was that its "greener" because you can swap out individual parts over time using the same case and ultimately producing less waste. You may also argue that individual components are easier to recycle.
At scale, compute boxes are rarely upgraded because it's TCO cheaper to invest in newer systems (or CPU, mb, RAM). IOW, it's cheaper to wait and refresh everything, that is unless you're adding RAM, CPUs or disks.
If form factors don't change, reusing the mounting hw, PSUs and enclosures can be doable. Some web shops wait until boxes die entirely before replacement while IT shops lifecycle out all gear (usually everything but racks) in 4-6 years.
These hotdog USB sticks aren't upgradable at all and they're limited to the processing power of 5-10W.
It has USB and microSD slots. This device is clearly not intended for serious computing, but it is more like a general purpose media device. Like a Chromecast/FireTV that is 100% customizable.
Reminds me of the tail end of netbooks. After MS had resuscitated XP via a restrictive OEM license, and Intel had cooked up the first gen or so of Atom...
I'm not really concerned about whether Linux will run 'fine' on less hardware, I'd just want to be able to purchase the higher-end (hardware-wise) version.
I'm not going to buy the high-end version if it requires me to buy the prepackaged Windows license however.
Yeah, its strange that the OS is preinstalled, whereas with the Intel NUC I believe it comes without an OS and you need to do the setup yourself, which is preferable.
Windows will run amazing on these and all things considered storage isn't an issue. They have really optimized for ultra small devices and id be willing to bet windows 8.1 on these would be super awesome actually. My daughters tablet with similar specs but only 1gb of ram is smooth as can be.
How much engineering effort is spent on optimization and improving performance, as opposed to changing the look'n'feel and adding consumer-focused features?
Apple works hard on power efficiency. You don't get high battery life for free. Memory usage may get less attention, but, for example, they do 'swap' to memory by compressing pages (does it help? I wouldn't know. Read http://dfrws.org/2014/proceedings/DFRWS2014-1.pdf)
Edit: oops. That paper isn't evaluating performance, as I thought it would.
Looking at the ubuntu system requirements page, they say: "From experience, we all know that it is recommended to have 2048 MiB RAM to properly run a day to day Ubuntu." .
Of course you can run something else, but for a hassle free experience , ubuntu seems like the best choice.
With Unity you certainly need more RAM but nothing prevents one from installing another wm like xfce, awesome or lxde to save a ton on RAM and run just fine on 1 Gb.
I'll happily buy the higher-end version and handle the Linux install myself, as long as I can remove the Windows license and get a subsequent refund from Microsoft.
But if thats not possible then I'll just wait until some other manufacturer makes a bad-ass Linux version for the same price, or less ..
With all likelyhood it comes with "Windows 8.1 with Bing", which means Intel will have paid 0$ to put it on there. There is no refund to get, and the extra cost is supposed to be justified by the extra ram and storage space.
I think I might pass on this.