As I continue to wind down Speeds and Feeds, I picked ruggedness as the topic for part 3.
In part 2 of this wrap-up series, I on Tuesday discussed reliability, suggesting that an increasing portion of the transistor budget in personal computers should be used to avoid, detect, and recover from hardware, software, and data errors.
Ruggedness, the ability of a PC to survive adverse physical conditions, complements reliability by further increasing the practical availability of a PC to do useful work.
As with efficiency in power management (part 1's topic), this is an area where PCs can learn a lot from cell phones. I expect my cell phone to continue operating normally unless it's physically damaged--and I expect that it will not be damaged even by fairly rough handling.
PCs, by comparison, are pretty fragile. I know that if I drop my laptop, even if it falls only a few feet to a carpeted floor, there's a good chance it will be damaged. The LCD could crack, the case could bend, the hard disk could crash, the battery latch could break. In fact, I've managed to do all of these things to one or more of the 15-plus laptops I've owned and used since 1984.
Not all laptops need to be rugged; for example, some laptops are used as small-footprint desktop computers and rarely moved at all, so ruggedness would be an unnecessary expense.
There are many situations, however, where greater ruggedness is obviously valuable: laptops for students (even in a classroom), field photographers, mechanics, factory workers, the military, and so on.
Some companies already make rugged systems for these applications, but demand for such systems is low, and they require a lot of additional engineering. The combination of small quantities and extra design work leads to very high prices; it isn't unusual to see rugged laptops with the features of a typical low-cost notebook selling for $4,000 or more.
There have been very few standard mass-market personal computers with any real degree of ruggedization. In the old days of 8-bit microcomputers, some consumer-oriented systems such as the popular Atari 400 and Commodore 64 were fairly robust due to heavy plastic cases designed to survive casual home use, but these weren't portable machines.
In the mid-1990s, Dell's Latitude line earned the favor of serious road warriors in part due to a high degree of ruggedness, if only in comparison with other mainstream laptops. Sometimes these Latitude models were the only survivors of annual notebook torture tests run by PC Computing magazine.
Panasonic's Toughbook line took over later in that decade as the first truly rugged notebooks. (I have a Toughbook 25 myself; alas, it's dead.) It's easy to see how these machines differ from ordinary notebooks: heavy magnesium casings with stiffening ribs to resist twisting, shock-mounted hard disks, water- and dust-resistant connectors, and so on. They aren't suitable for most people, though.
Three trends are bringing rugged systems closer to the mainstream today.
First, portable PCs are becoming increasingly more integrated into our daily lives. As power efficiency improves to the point that we can run them all day, portable machines will be even more important to us. But if these devices aren't rugged, we won't really be able take them with us as often as we'd like.
A simplified view of a small ruggedized notebook that I designed in 2005.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)Second, the components themselves are getting smaller, lighter, and in some cases more rugged. It's possible to buy a decent dual-core CPU that doesn't need a huge heat sink. Solid-state disk drives are a huge step forward; and with 128GB of capacity requiring only 32 flash chips, they can be much smaller than traditional hard disks. Smaller, lighter components are easier to support and protect.
Third, materials science is making a lot of progress. The glass used in LCDs is much better today than it was a decade ago--better able to absorb shock and flex a little when needed. (It's actually a little scary just how flexible the displays of some super-thin notebooks are.) New chassis materials such as milled aluminum and CFRP (carbon-fiber reinforced plastic) can produce very strong machines, though in most consumer systems they're used to reduce weight instead. In the near future, carbon nanotube-reinforced materials will become available in commercial quantities; while expensive, they will be very strong.
These new materials can be used in new ways to make very rugged machines that don't have to cost dramatically more than existing systems.
In 2005, as a practical exercise, I designed a small notebook with a milled titanium case and a novel mechanical design that provided exceptional stiffness. With a fixed battery and few external connectors (another improvement enabled by new technology), it would have provided Toughbook-like ruggedness in a very small and convenient package.
That design didn't go anywhere, but there are plenty of designers out there. I expect that someone will develop something similar before too long.
The current Netbook craze is directing a lot of attention to ruggedness as a design goal. These machines are small, light, and obviously portable, but they tend to be cheaply made and more fragile than many consumers would like. Adapting these designs to more rugged enclosures would add significant cost, but I think there's a good market for such machines.
The annual Maker Faire, which lies somewhere between San Francisco's counterculture tradition and Silicon Valley's materialism, is set for this weekend in San Mateo, Calif.
Now in its fourth year, the event is organized by Make magazine and showcases the work of people who build everything from wooden bicycles to life-size robotic critters.
I've been making some fun things myself since I bought a small milling machine awhile back. Here's a titanium adapter I made to attach a small commercial USB flash drive to my keychain:
A USB flash drive (right) with keychain adapters milled out of titanium.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)
The assembled titanium-reinforced drive fits into any USB jack.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)Not long ago I found some blocks of aluminum bar stock at HSC Electronics in Santa Clara and had the idea to turn one into a stand for my iPhone. I had the standard iPhone dock, but it's not very stable, and I wanted something better. I realized I could mill a pocket into the aluminum block for the dock, plus create a face for the iPhone to lean against. The result was nice, stable stand.
I decided to preserve the original finish on the block for an industrial look:
The first-generation iPhone stand, made from a cylindrical block of aluminum and Apple's iPhone dock.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)After making that first one, I thought of some other ways to apply the same idea:
Another design. The Apple iPhone stand slots into the recess at the bottom, between the "wings."
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)
Another design, polished up a little.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)This one's my favorite so far:
Yet another design, also with wings.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)
A side view.
(Credit: Peter N. Glaskowsky)There's always something at the Maker Faire to inspire more projects. Come back to Speeds & Feeds next week for a review of the event.
Boeing rolls out the 787 Dreamliner (here). Yup, that's the airplane I want.
Often missed in the news coverage is that Boeing has yet to announce exactly how the 787's composite structures-- skin, wings, tail, etc.-- are made. Early in the project there were some very definite rumors that Boeing had decided to go with a new kind of carbon-titanium composite made from layers of carbon fibers alternating with layers of titanium foil. The combination was said to have more fatigue resistance and a longer service life.
But as far as I know, Boeing has never addressed these rumors. The company said the 787 is 50% "composite materials" (usually meaning carbon or fiberglass plus a resin binder) by weight, 20% aluminum, 15% titanium, 10% steel, and 5% "other." But what parts are made of what material? I'm looking forward to finding out.
In other news, AMD announced price cuts (here) for its desktop processors. All dual-core Athlon 64 parts are under $200; the Athlon 64 FX chips a priced at $599 for two. Single-core chips go for $31 to $79. These cuts keep AMD's prices well under Intel's, and presumably make room for the arrival of the quad-core Barcelona next month.
- prev
- 1
- next





