StrongARM SBC performance of Squeak?

Alan Kay Alan.Kay at squeakland.org
Wed Jul 18 20:30:38 UTC 2001


Ned --

Look at Intel's site about their StrongArm kits. We ported Squeak to 
their 1100a kit last summer and it ran quite a bit better than it 
does on the iPAQ. This also might be an ideal start for you to roll a 
platform that will do what you want ....

Cheers,

Alan

At 11:24 AM -0700 7/18/01, Ned Konz wrote:
>We're looking at using Squeak on a small, low-power single-board computer,
>perhaps a StrongARM machine. This will mostly not be doing anything too
>interactive, but there will be a simple status display. There will be serial
>and network communications, as well as some database access (I may write a
>BerkeleyDB plugin to do this, as I don't need a relational DB).
>
>We will probably be running Linux, and using VNC for the display.
>
>But I wonder whether the performance will be adequate (I know, what's
>adequate...). Has anyone had any experience using Squeak (especially the
>development tools like the browsers) on such a device? I guess the Compaq
>iPaq is somewhat similar (200MHz or so processor, probably very little
>caching) to what we have in mind.
>
>I know there's iPaq users out there. Anyone experienced with using the
>browsers, etc. on such a device? How about via VNC?
>
>I'm trying Squeak on a 133MHz 586 single-board computer right now, and, while
>it's not speedy (this is an understatement), it would probably be OK for what
>we need. I just wouldn't want to spend too much time in the Morphic browsers
>(I know MVC is faster).
>
>It is a kick to see and interact with Squeak on a Palm using VNC over a
>115200bps PPP serial connection to an embedded processor board.
>
>--
>Ned Konz
>currently: Stanwood, WA
>email:     ned at bike-nomad.com
>homepage:  http://bike-nomad.com


-- 




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list