On Friday 06 June 2008 09:45:29 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> the problem is - if you have a nice screen but the engine to power it is
> underpowered, you will suffer from complaints of it just being slow then
> instead.
I'd like to wave the little "please can we have a decent SoC" flag again. Yes,
t
On Thursday 05 June 2008 10:29:36 Andy Green wrote:
> The Glamo offers normal async memory bus interface which we use, but it
> has a bunch of timing constraints. (There is a synchronous burst bus
> mode that we don't use because the CPU doesn't support it and adding a
> CPLD in there to translate
On Thursday 05 June 2008 11:29:10 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:33:58 +0200 Tom Cooksey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> babbled:
>
> > On Wednesday 04 June 2008 21:56:56 Andy Green wrote:
> > > | IMO, OpenMoko's choice of using the the glamo was a bi
On Wednesday 04 June 2008 21:56:56 Andy Green wrote:
> | IMO, OpenMoko's choice of using the the glamo was a big mistake
> (Connecting it to a
> | shared, 4-bit bus was probably the _biggest_ mistake).
>
> Huh what? It's a 16-bit memory bus, maybe you mean 2^4 ;-) When I
> actually use the thing
On Tuesday 03 June 2008 09:06:35 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> the day nvidia comes with open drivers for this... we can begin to take an
> interest :)
Sorry, just how open is the current glamo driver exactly?
IMO, OpenMoko's choice of using the the glamo was a big mistake (Connecting it
to a
share
On Wednesday 21 May 2008 21:45:37 Michael Shiloh wrote:
> * Ported Qtopia to Xorg, so it is possible to run Qtopia, GTK, ELF, and
> Python applications all at the same time
Hmmm... Just wondering if anyone has seen this:
http://labs.trolltech.com/blogs/2008/05/13/introducing-qgtkstyle/
Ba
Hiya,
I have been having problems with pth for some time (at least a month). I've
held off posting, hoping it would get fixed before I needed a build. Sadly, I
need a build for next week and it is still failing with:
pth_mctx.c:476:2: error: #error "Unsupported Linux (g)libc version and/or
platf
On Wednesday 21 May 2008 13:13:33 Roland Häder wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21. May 2008, Tom Cooksey wrote:
> > On Wednesday 21 May 2008 10:19:49 Rod Whitby wrote:
> > > Holger Freyther wrote:
> > > > To unify our tools we have reduced the number of SCMs to learn from
&g
On Wednesday 21 May 2008 10:19:49 Rod Whitby wrote:
> Holger Freyther wrote:
> > To unify our tools we have reduced the number of SCMs to learn from three
> > to
> > two. This means we only use subversion and git for now. I have moved the
> > Openembedded metadata from monotone to git.
> ...
> >
On Thursday 08 May 2008 10:23:30 Pietro "m0nt0" Montorfano wrote:
> Well, i don't want to make any flame/spam/anything-like-that, just a
> question to clarify how is the situation. Well, on the neo freerunner
> there will be the 3d capable chip which has its spec under NDA so it's
> impossible f
On Monday 28 April 2008 17:31:10 Mikko Rauhala wrote:
> On ma, 2008-04-28 at 09:26 -0500, Tim Shannon wrote:
> > But isn't it still limited by the bandwidth available from the micro
> > SD card? Maybe I misunderstood that.
>
> Yes it is. It's just that sending mpeg4 packets to the glamo takes j
On Monday 28 April 2008 10:32:22 Bin Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Tom Cooksey
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thursday 24 April 2008 13:20:12 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> >
> > > again - we could do better if we limited ourselves to just mpeg4
On Thursday 24 April 2008 13:20:12 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> again - we could do better if we limited ourselves to just mpeg4 (which is
> what
> almost all phones do - they do only 1 codec or maybe 2), but the problem here
> is that xv does not provide a way to do this sanely (stream just mpeg4 d
On Monday 07 April 2008 14:00:42 Federico Lorenzi wrote:
> First off, this is by no means official in any way. Vote on [1] if you
> _think_ 3G is essential for a successor to FreeRunner
Depends on what you mean by 3G? If you mean 3G as in HSPA then yes, it's
a useful feature to have when out of ra
On Sunday 30 March 2008 13:42:23 Harald Welte wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 07:46:52PM +0100, joerg wrote:
> > Am Do 27. März 2008 schrieb Lally Singh:
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Andy Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> > > >
> > >
> > I had those questions too, I think that when 3D specs of the Glamo chip
> > will be available, it will be possible to make some 3D-accelerated
> > tasks, but I've no idea about the performances of this chip. Anyway I
> > don't think it's so great...
>
> Right, but because it is local to the gl
A friend just forwarded this on to me:
http://www.telecoms.com/itmgcontent/tcoms/news/articles/20017514053.html
Please, PLEASE tell me this is not true? Or at least it's the consumer version
that's
delayed?
Cheers,
Tom
___
OpenMoko community mai
17 matches
Mail list logo
