Windows frontends suck

**tripzero** · 08-29-2008, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by 2k1Toaster

Nobody has implemented it that I know of, but it is possible to do easily. And I think every main frontend supports 1pc -> multiple monitors (control or display only)

And like your last sentence, nobody is going to run 3 or 4 carPC's. Even the kids and dad will use 1 PC almost always. Cost and ease of implementation.

So I can see this being beneficial in Home Automation, but those apps already do networking interfaces so again, not so much new. Maybe in how, but not in end result.

Thinking about it more, I can see at least two cases where you would want 2 pc's:

1) for the uber audio-file guy: machine 1 would be a headless system running a real-time OS (linux of course). machine 2 would do nav, obdII logging, gui stuff game playing and everything else.

2) for the uber engine modding guy: machine 1 would do data-critical real-time logging of engine sensors, etc. machine 2 would do everything else.

Most people will probably never use it, but is it because they don't have the need, or is it because that there is not underlying software infrastructure that allows it? Whatever the answer, I think the concept is cool

**Tidder** · 08-29-2008, 01:14 PM

I have often thought of the same thing. I have/am seriously considered/ing doing a dual PC setup in my car. My reasons are a little different though. I've noticed my EPIA 800 can play music for almost 3 hours with the car off, and the battery still has enough juice to crank and start the car. It is however slow as hell using it for anything else. But back when I had my P4 system, I got maybe 45 minutes to an hour before I had to start it up otherwise the battery would be too weak to crank. So I've been trying to dream up a way to have an ultra low power system as well as a nice fast beefy system for just that purpose. Maybe someday...

**tripzero** · 08-29-2008, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by Tidder

I have often thought of the same thing. I have/am seriously considered/ing doing a dual PC setup in my car. My reasons are a little different though. I've noticed my EPIA 800 can play music for almost 3 hours with the car off, and the battery still has enough juice to crank and start the car. It is however slow as hell using it for anything else. But back when I had my P4 system, I got maybe 45 minutes to an hour before I had to start it up otherwise the battery would be too weak to crank. So I've been trying to dream up a way to have an ultra low power system as well as a nice fast beefy system for just that purpose. Maybe someday...

That's a good point. You could have a super low powered embedded system running nghost that acts as the audio player which is on all the time. Then a full carpc that connects to it for everything else.

**Bugbyte** · 08-29-2008, 09:44 PM

I realize that the architecture of nGhost is completely different, but everytime I look at the demos, it does less stuff than RR. What is so unique about it?

Aside from the architectural elegance of nGhost, what is it that is so innovative? I think RR is incredibly innovative from a functionality standpoint.

I should point out that I'm not criticizing, just asking. Help me to understand.

**tripzero** · 08-29-2008, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by Bugbyte

I realize that the architecture of nGhost is completely different, but everytime I look at the demos, it does less stuff than RR. What is so unique about it?

Aside from the architectural elegance of nGhost, what is it that is so innovative? I think RR is incredibly innovative from a functionality standpoint.

I should point out that I'm not criticizing, just asking. Help me to understand.

you are 100% correct in your observation. RR implements more features than nGhost does. Bear in mind RR is one of the oldest frontends in existence (possibly the oldest with a sizable following?). The nGhost 2 series is almost a month old now. It's superior in every way architecturally than ng1, but that's not saying much... The idea is, with a good solid core of functionality, additional features will be easy to add. With an innovative core, in theory, you can get more innovative features.

Also, I'm a firm believer that architecture attracts developers. We are a small bunch right now, but growing. The more devs, the faster we will catch up with RR. Then, the world

!

Right now, nGhost has one feature that will really set it a part, it integrates better with your OS. It is your mobile desktop.

In the end, when each has equal features (without regard to who implements what better...), the choice will amount to this: "with which can I build the leanest, fastest, and most useful system." At that point, there will only be one choice: nGhost.