Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
(Every time this thread pops up again, I knock on wood since my net6501-50s (with both heatsink revisions) have been bulletproof...) WRT the net6801, sounds like it was probably a confluence of issues, mostly market-related. Intel C2000 problems aside, Asian ODMs are making viable inexpensive Celeron/Atom boxes, AMD got back in the cheap embedded game and PC Engines got the APU out the door 2 years after the net6501, and as Jan mentioned, ADI Engineering beat Soekris to market with all-Intel headless options with the Turbot and RCC boards (and then got acquired by Silicom, so they're set for cash.) Meanwhile, the new Soekris DACs seem like they're really good in their niche and also have the kind of margins that other Soekris designs enjoy. RE: Those Amazon bots, I was really surprised to see that was an article from 2016. I thought the net4526 was out of production for a decade+ On 4/7/2017 10:03, Jan Ceuleers wrote: > On 07/04/17 18:18, David Ruggiero wrote: >>> Maybe it's just me ... but this is the part that I find unlikely. Why >>> would a huge company like Intel do that? They already admitted that a >>> similar problem exists in related chipsets. >> I fully agree - weakest part of my argument. Why would Intel care >> about a customer whose total chip purchases amount to a rounding error >> in their yearly embedded system sales? Seems like they could just say >> "too bad". > My succession of little green boxes have now been succeeded by a > Netgate/ADI Engineering 2440, which has an Atom C2xxx CPU that has the > bug that's been in the press. But due to a fortunate coincidence the bug > can be sidestepped in software in this product, and I received an alert > from the company I purchased the product from containing information on > how to upgrade to a BIOS that works around the problem. > > So the kind of customer service we enjoyed years ago from Soekris, but > no longer. > > Jan > ___ > Soekris-tech mailing list > Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com > http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
--- Ken Hornstein wrote: > FWIW, I just powered off my net5501 two weeks ago > and replaced it with an APU2 from PCEngines. I've had trouble getting the wireless on the APU2 working in OpenBSD, even after downloading and installing the not-quite-free device driver. Ken Hendrickson ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
>I've had trouble getting the wireless on the APU2 working in OpenBSD, >even after downloading and installing the not-quite-free device driver. Can't help you there; I see the notes for the add-on wireless module says "not supported by all operating systems" and I didn't get one of those. But this isn't the PCengines support mailing list, I think! --Ken ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
On 07/04/17 18:18, David Ruggiero wrote: > > Maybe it's just me ... but this is the part that I find unlikely. Why > > would a huge company like Intel do that? They already admitted that a > > similar problem exists in related chipsets. > > I fully agree - weakest part of my argument. Why would Intel care > about a customer whose total chip purchases amount to a rounding error > in their yearly embedded system sales? Seems like they could just say > "too bad". My succession of little green boxes have now been succeeded by a Netgate/ADI Engineering 2440, which has an Atom C2xxx CPU that has the bug that's been in the press. But due to a fortunate coincidence the bug can be sidestepped in software in this product, and I received an alert from the company I purchased the product from containing information on how to upgrade to a BIOS that works around the problem. So the kind of customer service we enjoyed years ago from Soekris, but no longer. Jan ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
> Maybe it's just me ... but this is the part that I find unlikely. Why > would a huge company like Intel do that? They already admitted that a > similar problem exists in related chipsets. I fully agree - weakest part of my argument. Why would Intel care about a customer whose total chip purchases amount to a rounding error in their yearly embedded system sales? Seems like they could just say "too bad". Of course, it works the other way, too - Soekris is so small that the cost of buying their silence was minimal, and perhaps their marketroids thought it better to put the small fire out and get it behind them. Still, it's odd, but I couldn't come up with any better explanation. Also definitely think it's possible that Soekris is just resting on its laurels and riding it out until Soren retires. Maybe they have huge government/OEM contracts that take care of paying the bills with much less hassle than the onesie-and-twosie retail market (e.g. their boards are used in some of the early versions of the Kiva / Amazon warehouse robots: http://robohub.org/meet-the-drone-that-already-delivers-your-packages-kiva- robot-teardown/ ). /DR/ ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
>C) Intel, wanting to avoid the bad publicity that would result from their >component's failure when used in a supposedly "super reliable" machine >built entirely around it, makes a simple deal with Soekris: we'll pay the >costs of ALL warranty replacements for your boards that die due to our chip >biting the dust. And further, pay for you to scrap your current inventory >with the bad part. Maybe it's just me ... but this is the part that I find unlikely. Why would a huge company like Intel do that? They already admitted that a similar problem exists in related chipsets. If that is true, and Soekris made that deal ... bad move on their part. It looks to me, as a third-party observer, that with the canceling of the 6801 and radio silence on all other fronts that it is extremely unlikely there will be any new hardware forthcoming, and Soekris has gone into "maintenance mode". Which is a shame; usually an advantage with small companies is that customer serivce is better because they know that is one way they can compete against larger companies. But since it seems like they don't stand behind their products I guess it's time to move on. FWIW, I just powered off my net5501 two weeks ago and replaced it with an APU2 from PCEngines. --Ken ___ Soekris-tech mailing list Soekris-tech@lists.soekris.com http://lists.soekris.com/mailman/listinfo/soekris-tech
Re: [Soekris] net6501: doesn't start if not first unplugged for 8 minutes
> "The net6501 seems to have this sort of problem, and it’s fatal. At some point your box will likely > stop booting entirely. [...] The root cause of death is not well understood, at least not by anyone > outside of Soekris. There does not seem to be a cure. The 5501 by comparison seems almost > impossible to kill." I've some speculation on what is happening behind the scenes here; it could be dead-on - or completely wacko. I don't expect anyone to wade through this whole posting, as it's way too long (though there is a two-sentence TL;DR version at the bottom). Putting it out there, though, just in case a future someone is piecing together the puzzle together and finds it helpful. So: Let's take what we either know as fact, or can pretty reliably believe to be true, and speculate from there: 1) Soren K / Soekris clearly has the ability to design and manufacture stable, reliable systems - witness every Soekris product before the net6501. 2) Yet...the net6501 has a maddening, common failure mode, one so severe the board is totally bricked, without recourse, even if it was running perfectly minutes beforehand. 3) No one understands the root causes of the failure, and Soekris has been extraordinarily close-lipped about it, in these forums and elsewhere. No explanations whatsoever. Total silence even as reports of the dead boards mount mount and their reputation looks worse and worse. Doesn't make sense. 4) Data point A: If you send a dead board back to Soekris _in_ the warranty period, it will be quickly replaced without question. Data point B: If you send a dead board back to Soekris _out_ of warranty, for diagnosis and repair, it will simply be returned as "can't be fixed". Data point C: When you inquire _why_ it can't be fixed - after all, aren't components, even board-level ones, ultimately replaceable? - you won't get any answer at all. They'll just tell you... "we're really sorry, wish we could, we can't.". End of story. 5) Last year, Soekris suddenly and with very little explanation cancelled development of a new Intel-Atom-based board - what would have been the net6801. 6) Intel had/has a severe problem with clock chips in other embedded Atom CPU products (but supposedly, not the Atom E6xx the net6501 uses - see: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/06/cisco_intel_de cline_to_link_product_warning_to_faulty_chip/ ) This clock chip failure is so severe that it can kill the system it's being used in completely. SOI'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest one speculative scenario that pulls together all of the above and explains the net6501 and Soekris's actions around it. Note carefully that I have no association with Soekris nor Intel whatsoever, except as a customer of both; this speculation is constructed with absolutely zero "inside" information. A) The net6501 brickings we see are due to a similar - or identical - Intel clock chip degradation issue as the C2000 embedded Atom chip had. The failure is extreme and can't be patched around by simple mods to hardware or firmware; it's 'baked in' to the product. B) Soekris knows this. Intel privately admits this to them. C) Intel, wanting to avoid the bad publicity that would result from their component's failure when used in a supposedly "super reliable" machine built entirely around it, makes a simple deal with Soekris: we'll pay the costs of ALL warranty replacements for your boards that die due to our chip biting the dust. And further, pay for you to scrap your current inventory with the bad part. D) Soekris accepts, and pays nothing for Intel's failure. They get what amounts to a huge settlement for such a small company, without spending big on lawyer fees or waiting for years to get the dough. Their future liability for dead net6501 is now zero. E) In return, Intel pays out what (for them) amounts to change found their couch cushions - it's a trivial amount. More importantly, since it's only agreeing to reimburse Soekris for in-warranty items, its financial exposure is strictly limited - it ends exactly three years from when Soekris sold the last bad-Intel-part board. (Public corporation accountants *love* closed-end liabilities.) Everyone's happy... F) except for: the Faustian bargain Soekris had to make with Intel's horde of lawyers to have the above happen. As a condition of accepting the above pile o' cash and shielding themselves from crippling warranty returns payouts, Soekris signs in blood that they will to maintain 1001% silence on the issue and the nature - or even existence! - of their agreement with Intel. They're allowed to make NO mention of *why* their boards are dying prematurely. Never, ever. Not even a HINT. They have to keep clam forever - or else the money spigot dries up and/or they get sued into oblivion. G) So...Soekris quietly replaces the net6501s that Intel gives them hard cash to take care of, and regretfully ignores the rest. Their bank account remains intact - but at the cost o
