My Dream PC -- Silent, Cold, and Motionless

On 23 Mar 2007 21:01:29 -0700
"Radium" wrote:

I wonder if it is possible to design a PC that does not reqiure any
fans or discs.

Well, they do make solid state "disks" (a bit expensive, mind you, but
not moving parts). As for the fanless part, I already have one of
those (it is absolutely silent):

http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/zooty/zooty.html

Of course it'll work. That's why all the major manufacturers already
produce computers using that design...

--

DaveW

___________
"Radium" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi:

I wonder if it is possible to design a PC that does not reqiure any
fans or discs.

This computer uses RAM chips -- instead of magnetic discs -- in to
store information and does not need a CPU because each bit of
information is provided with a processing unit and its own memory.
This would make the PC run much faster and not need any fans or moving
parts. It is entirely chip-based. Since each bit is provided with its
own memory and processing, this would prevent crashes or overheating
from occuring.

Also, couldn't a PC be built in such a way that it freshly generates
the correct electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them
back from its ROM chips?

Its not that I don't like ROM. I was curious as to whether there is an
"on the fly" alternative that freshly-generates the electronic signals
[that are normally stored in ROMs] instead of playing them back from
the ROM.

There are sets of instructions stored in ROMs. In the case of a PC,
these instructions load before the CPU "knows" it has a hard drive or
other peripheral devices. Couldn't those instructions be generated in
real-time insteading of storing them?

I am aware that EEPROM is reliable, low power, customizable, reprogram-
able, cheap and proven. But just out of curiosity, my dream PC is hard-
coded [thus not needing any ROM] and also uses RAM chips -- instead of
magnetic discs -- in to store information and does not need a CPU
because each bit of information is provided with a processing unit and
its own memory. This would make the PC run much faster and not need
any fans or moving parts. It is entirely chip-based. Since each bit is
provided with its own memory and processing, this would prevent
crashes or overheating from occurring.

Other specs are below. The stuff below also do not need any ROM memory
because they are physically-built to generate the signals which
correspond to the following.

OS: Windows 98SE
Browser: Mozilla Suite 1.8b

No fans, no discs, no moving parts, no ROM [except for the CD/DVD
recording/playing and re-writing].

IOW, my dream PC would work perfectly but would not need any moving
parts, discs, or fans. The "HDD" would consists of silicon RAM chips
in place of disc-platters and electric parts in place of magnetic
parts. No moving parts, no noise, no fans, no magnets, no hazardous
heat.

To put it simply, what I am describing is a PC that does not need to
store any information because all of the signal codings for the info
is generated in real-time.

The following is a bad analogy but I'll add it anyway.

PC reading info from memory = sample playback synth playing back its
samples of sounds of an FM synth.

PC generating its signals in real-time = an *actual* FM synth freshly-
generating its tones "on the fly".

Yes, I know, the above is a poor analogy but I couldn't think of
anything better.


Thanks,

Radium

On Mar 24, 7:37 am, Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
On 2007-03-24, Radium wrote:

Also, couldn't a PC be built in such a way that it freshly generates
the correct electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them
back from its ROM chips?

Well yes. You indirectly mention microcode later in your post
which is not present on all processors - some instead prefer
so-called 'random logic' (because a schematic appears to have no
discernable pattern or structure). For microcode it's viable
although inflexible - consider the Pentium f00f bug which was
corrected with new microcode. With random logic you'd need a new,
redesigned chip.

For anything other than microcode, it would quickly become impractical.
If you were writing,say, a bottloader, you would have to write your
software and then design a chip from scratch that spat it out.
Such a chip would likely be bigger and slower than a ROM chip.

quotes from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcode :

"Each machine instruction (add, shift, move) was implemented directly
with circuitry. This provided fast performance, but as instruction
sets grew more complex, hard-wired instruction sets became more
difficult to design and debug."

I still prefer the "hard-wired instruction sets"

"a bug could often be fixed by replacing a portion of the microprogram
rather than by changes being made to hardware logic and wiring."

But I still perfer the "hardware logic and wiring".

Yup. Just for personal preference, I also like my PC to be massively-
parallel.

The following is a bad analogy but I'll add it anyway.

PC reading info from memory = sample playback synth playing back its
samples of sounds of an FM synth.

PC generating its signals in real-time = an *actual* FM synth freshly-
generating its tones "on the fly".

This appears more confusing than the main thrust of your article
for several reasons, and I suspect you're not altogether clear of
the underlying priciples. But I'm no expert there so I'll leave
that one lie.

How is this FM-synth analogy more confusing than the rest of my
message?

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 20:46:34 GMT, Tom Horsley
wrote:

On 23 Mar 2007 21:01:29 -0700
"Radium" wrote:

I wonder if it is possible to design a PC that does not reqiure any
fans or discs.

Well, they do make solid state "disks" (a bit expensive, mind you, but
not moving parts). As for the fanless part, I already have one of
those (it is absolutely silent):

http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley/zooty/zooty.html


Solid state *drives* need not be expensive if very high
capacity and performance don't matter. A 4GB CF card and an
IDE adapter can be had for about $50. Since most of that
cost is the CF card, even $10 is possible for an embedded
system with lesser capacity needs.

On 2007-03-24, Radium wrote:
Hi:

I wonder if it is possible to design a PC that does not reqiure any
fans or discs.

definately.

This computer uses RAM chips -- instead of magnetic discs -- in to
store information and does not need a CPU because each bit of
information is provided with a processing unit and its own memory.
This would make the PC run much faster and not need any fans or moving
parts. It is entirely chip-based. Since each bit is provided with its
own memory and processing, this would prevent crashes or overheating
from occuring.

you could just dunk the wole lot in fluorinert, or transformer oil...

Via makes some low power X86 cpus too. some of them will run without
forced air.

as for doing without disk, reasonable large flash modules are available.

Also, couldn't a PC be built in such a way that it freshly generates
the correct electric signals ["on the fly"] instead of playing them
back from its ROM chips?

Its not that I don't like ROM. I was curious as to whether there is an
"on the fly" alternative that freshly-generates the electronic signals
[that are normally stored in ROMs] instead of playing them back from
the ROM.

If there is it'd be called a rom. possibly a mask rom, these chipa aren't
programmed, so they aren't storing info, they're made that way.


Bye.
Jasen

On 2007-03-25, Radium wrote:

"Each machine instruction (add, shift, move) was implemented directly
with circuitry. This provided fast performance, but as instruction
sets grew more complex, hard-wired instruction sets became more
difficult to design and debug."

I still prefer the "hard-wired instruction sets"

go with a risc processor then. eg: arm, power-pc, sparc etc

you won't run W98 on them but if you pick the right one WinCE
is a possibility.


Bye.
Jasen

jasen wrote:
On 2007-03-25, Radium wrote:

"Each machine instruction (add, shift, move) was implemented
directly with circuitry. This provided fast performance, but as
instruction sets grew more complex, hard-wired instruction sets
became more difficult to design and debug."

I still prefer the "hard-wired instruction sets"

go with a risc processor then. eg: arm, power-pc, sparc etc

you won't run W98 on them but if you pick the right one WinCE
is a possibility.

Why recommend such expensive and poor systems when various Linuxes
and RTOSs are freely available, and proof against obsolescence
since source is also available.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
http://cbfalconer.home.att.net


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A bit like my 1st wife then!

SteveH

SteveH wrote:

A bit like my 1st wife then!

SteveH


Before, or after?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

On 2007-03-26, CBFalconer wrote:
jasen wrote:
On 2007-03-25, Radium wrote:

I still prefer the "hard-wired instruction sets"

go with a risc processor then. eg: arm, power-pc, sparc etc

you won't run W98 on them but if you pick the right one WinCE
is a possibility.

Why recommend such expensive and poor systems when various Linuxes
and RTOSs are freely available, and proof against obsolescence
since source is also available.

I wouldn't have spelled it "wince" if I was reccomending it.
The guy wanted W98, the closest he'll get on non-x86 hardware
is Windows CE.

As you say linux will do the job, especially if all he wants to
do is run Mozilla 1.8, But he'll have to do without
advanced flash "swfdec" isn't as capable as the real thing, but it's
catching up.

Bye.
Jasen