Talos, For Those Needing Powerful Computing

“Talosâ„¢ is a state-of-the-art mainboard designed for the new IBM POWER8 architecture. It is the first and only high performance computer with absolutely no proprietary software or firmware blobs. With its ATX form factor, Talosâ„¢ brings a level of performance to the workstation realm usually found in dedicated servers and a level of freedom and user control long extinct in modern hardware. In addition to its onboard, open-toolchain FPGAs, Talosâ„¢ easily and tightly interfaces with GPUs, FPGAs, and custom hardware.”
 
See Talos Secure Workstation
FSF (Free Software Foundation) is backing a crowd-funded project to develop a motherboard for a workstation that’s competitive in the “power” department with Intel’s Xeon. I don’t need anywhere near that kind of power in my home so I’ve opted for ARM for small/efficient computing, but if you need the power and don’t want Intel nor Intel’s backdoor it might be just your thing. The price is a show-stopper for me. It starts ~$7K just for a naked motherboard. It is a fine motherboard but after spending more on CPUs, RAM etc. it’s out of my league at least for this year and probably next despite the growth of my stock portfolio. If I do a “big ticket” purchase, it will be an electric car next year. This year, I might be going halvers on a meat grinder and I will buy some kind of ARMed server. Perhaps the IBM Power solutions will be less expensive in a couple of years…

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Talos, For Those Needing Powerful Computing

  1. Kurkosdr says:

    If a vehicle cannot pass crash testing, it won’t be sold.

    They sell such vehicles as three-wheeled motorcycles. In the EU there is even the “quadrocycle” loophole, which is how the Reva Gwiz is sold. In the US there is the tailor-made “Neighborhood Electric Vehicle” loophole, but in this case the lawmakers had the sense to put a mandatory speed limiter of 25mph on the thing (unlike the Eurocrats who let those vehicles travel at any speed the manufacturer wants) If a company selling gasoline-powered cars went the three-wheeler and quadrocycle route, they ‘d be nailed to the wall for taking advantage of a loophole to sell unsafe vehicles, but when some company selling (or promising to sell) electric vehicles does it, it’s OK because they are green.

    This is how the term “electric vehicle” came into existence. Before Tesla, very few of those “electric vehicles” (that weren’t retrofits of a gas-powered car) actually classified as cars.

  2. dougman says:

    This three-wheel beanie, has no air-bags and does not facilitate crumple-zones. If a vehicle cannot pass crash testing, it won’t be sold. PERIOD.

  3. oiaohm says:

    https://peraves.wordpress.com/

    dougman monotrace has the same kind of outer of chassis as the Solo EV and due to its light mass out performed most vehicles in crash tests. Yes Solo EV uses kelvar in its outer shell the same way the mono-trace does.

    So claiming it would never pass a crash test is being a foolish idiot because vehicles of similar construction have been tested and passed. If the maths were done all right the Solo EV should pass the crash testing just fine because the right materials and basic construction are similar to those that have passed. Of course before buying one I would like to see confirmed crash testing results.

  4. dougman wrote, “the three-wheel beanie would never pass a crash test.”

    If you mean the Solo EV, don’t be too sure. It is very light weight so it doesn’t need nearly as much crash-resistance. The thing was developed by people who know racing cars so they didn’t neglect crashes. The “civilian” model, driven by me should never be in a crash. I drive so little and I’ve driven 40 years without a crash, not even a “fender-bender”. I did break a headlight once on the tailgate of a truck. It was on wet ice and I slid about 50 feet on a slight downhill and could not avoid it by the time it was obvious. I could have changed lanes though to pass the truck, a big mistake. Cost me $20 for a new bulb. I may not drive the thing in winter so perhaps that’s even less of a concern. I also drive at “off-peak” hours so there are more holes in traffic and folks aren’t as crazy.

  5. dougman says:

    True, the three-wheel beanie would never pass a crash test.

  6. Kurkosdr says:

    Another pay now, never acquire project Pogsey?

    Gotta love all those no-name companies putting out cute EV prototypes and teasing folks with more green guilt than brains with promises of mass production.

    Hint: Elon Musk was a rich millionaire funding the company also with private funds and guarantees, and Tesla got through near bankruptcy to mass produce the Roadster, and they already had the chassis ready from Lotus.

    But Pog thinks some crowdfunders can do it for 3.7 mil. including tooling and raw materials. You can’t even R&D the we-won’t-classify-it-as-car-because-it-can’t-pass-crash-tests deathtrap “EV” they promised with that kind of money.

    PS: What was the link again? I don’t remember all the outrageous claims and want to revisit.

    Another pay now, never acquire project Pogsey?
    Gotta love how all those crowdfunding dudes have learned to set the target low so they get to keep the money even if they can’t realistically make the thing. Projects like Oculus VR and Ouya delivered because they overshoot their target multiple times, so someone thought “maybe there is a entrepreneurship opportunity in there after all, holy poop we are actually making this!”. But, to Pog and others who “contribute” to crowdfunded hardware, learn this: Nobody is going to go through the hell that is modern R&D and tooling of hardware to make your little limited-run toy and then fold.

  7. dougman wrote, “$503,110 raised of $3,700,000 goal”.

    Yes, it doesn’t look good, but I think it’s still a project worth doing if they can find the money to do it right. There is a need for more competition in the market. Apparently, the market agrees with me that price matters.

  8. dougman says:

    Another pay now, never acquire project Pogsey?

    $503,110 raised of $3,700,000 goal
    4 days left
    14% funded

    Another lesson in futility.

Leave a Reply