Thus far it seems that netbooks with Windows XP and Intel Atom processors have been the most successful, leaving little room for other players. There have been those who doubt ARM's longevity in this particular market, so we decided to interview some of the folks at ARM. They told OSNews that the company is confident about its current and future mobile markets, and Linux, which will soon be on various ARM-powered netbooks, is one of the reasons why.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2006-11-08
Member since:
2005-07-06
‘3x3-inch’, seriously, you’re going to still use inches on an international Web-site?
That’s depressing. Is there no policy that says Imperial should not be encouraged in articles? Or where it’s not a direct quotation, for it to be supplemented/replaced with metric?
Member since:2005-06-29
http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=unit+converter&btnG=Zoeken&meta...
It's not that big of a deal. We're all smart in here, we can figure it out.
Member since:2005-07-06
It's not that big of a deal. We're all smart in here, we can figure it out.
No, it’s not a big deal, I just wanted to know.
At what point of melting the internet from unit conversions will have OSnews change their mind?
Member since:2006-11-08
Member since:2006-07-12
Member since:2008-12-06
Not that it's a big deal or anything 
but the person who I interviewed (weildish = Jordan Spencer Cunningham, by the way-- probably confusing how that worked out) said "3x3 inches". Perhaps we could put links of any Imperial figures to hover one's mouse over to get the metric conversion and vice versa if it really bothers a group of people. Though I doubt that's going to happen, personally.
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-07-06
The assumption on your part is that it wasn’t 8×8cm and had been imperialised for the interviewer.
Member since:2005-11-11
Member since:2006-01-27
Using inches for monitor sizing is standard practice in the computer industry, even in the UK. If the manufacturer calls it a 3" screen, then it's a 3" screen. Did you think that OSNews reporters randomly convert measurements in their stories?!?
What difference does it make anyway?
Member since:
2005-07-10
Member since:2009-02-11
Well, no it's not a matter of weeks for Intel to ramp a SoC.
Basically SoC in on the roadmap for Intel. I believe it's meant to appear with next- or with next-next-iteration of the Atom platform for mobile devices.
So, we should see some prototypes of Intel Atom SoC by 2010 or 2011.
However your comment is interesting, because yeah ARM has some advance over Intel, but not that much. If really all those ARM netbooks are planned to be available by Q1 2010 (that's 2009 Christmas), it's possible that Intel will just be 6 monts - 1 year behind. And Intel chips, well, you know, are x86-compatible. Which means mainstream Microsoft Windows, and you know how the Windows marketing machine is. ;-)
Furthermore, Intel is really good at designing chips. So I wouldn't surprised that at that moment, the Intel SoC would be more powerful that the ARM SoC -- enough to run Windows 7 in a satisfying way, actually.
Besides the goal of "cheap second device" means that you are not really dependent on it. All your data is on-line or so. What I mean is that even if ARM earns a good share of the netbook market, people could easilly switch from ARM to Intel netbooks if Intel manages to afford similarly priced devices with similar power usage and more processing power.
Think of the Mac-PC "war". It's not that easy to "switch" because it's 1000€ devices, because you're putting a lot of effort in customizing the user interface to your own tastes, because the operating systems are different, because different applications are not always cross-compatible, and so on.
Now think of your mobile phone. Most people limits their customization to the choice of the phone rings (and often ther do not care a lot if they must change to another one when changing phone) and the contacts are in the SIM card. Basically, all these people can change phone, they do not really care. Those with more need (professionnals) certainly synchronize their phones with their computer or with some on-line service. There, too, it's not a big deal to change phone.
To conclude, ARM has good cards in hands, but ARM should not be too much confident. Intel has a lot of good cards, too... I would really expect these ARM netbooks to be available much sooner -- really, I find that Christmas 2009 is late. Beware ARM!
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2007-07-27
intel does already sell soc's.
their old media soc combined a xscale core with an older powervr gpu (wimre the iphone uses the same gpu):
http://www.intel.com/design/celect/2110/ce2110_brief.pdf
the new soc contains a 800 mhz pentium m, a gma 500 graphic core (=powervr sgx 535) and memory controller.
http://download.intel.com/design/celect/downloads/ce3100-product-br...
and their next one will use an atom core.
Edited 2009-04-20 13:48 UTC
Member since:
2006-01-04
Member since:2007-02-17
I'm assuming that you mean "other than Intel graphics chips" in the context of that comment?
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_r700_oss_3d&...
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16515
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=via_nov_20&num=1
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njk1NQ
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-14782.html
http://www.phoronix.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-12389.html
Pick one.
Edited 2009-04-20 10:27 UTC
Member since:2006-01-04
Member since:2007-02-17
ARM CPUs are SOCs with their own graphic cores (mostly PowerVR AFAIK).. open source AMD and VIA (which still totally suck) drivers won't help one bit.
Great! That is even easier then. ARM obviously already know all of the programming registers for their own graphics cores.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesa_3D_(OpenGL)
http://www.mesa3d.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Rendering_Infrastructure
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Rendering_Manager
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallium3D
http://www.tungstengraphics.com/wiki/index.php/Gallium3D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X.Org_Server
Just port that lot (actually, ARM probably already have).
PS: Yes, indeed, it looks like ARM already have done precisely that:
http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/006/05/powervr_mbx.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR
For other 3D graphics chips such a port (once the 3D programming registers are known) has taken only a few months.
However, even having discovered about ARM and PowerVR, one still cannot discount an ARM/ATI combination:
http://www.symbian-freak.com/news/006/05/ati_ft_nokia.htm
Edited 2009-04-20 11:16 UTC
Member since:2006-01-04
Member since:2007-02-17
Did you even read the links I gave?
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_r700_oss_3d&...
The second sentence in that article links here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzAxNg
Posted by Michael Larabel on January 26, 2009"
Your guess that "the AMD specs have been out for years now" is off by "years now". Try "Months now".
Here is an extra clue from the links I gave:
The status of the corresponding open source 3D driver for the Radeon HD 2000, 3000, and 4000, from the links I gave:
This was the status as at ...
Published on April 18, 2009
Written by Michael Larabel"
April 18th, 2009.
From Jan 26 to April 18 work on the rudimentary support for 3D has been commenced, using the specs alone. A complete re-write was required from the existing R500 driver. Following the code relase on April 18, work is now expected to go much faster, and there are hopes for a working driver to be released within a month or so.
Failing to read and understand linked stuff (which BTW was entirely relevant) doesn't prove yours.
Edited 2009-04-21 03:51 UTC
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-02-17
My netbook is an ASUS EEEPC model 1000H, and it has hardware 3d (Intel graphics).
It is a boon for running KDE4 ... which in turn uses accelerated graphics hardware to render the desktop. This is especially useful for rendering fonts and anti-aliasing. This use of accelerated graphics hardware makes KDE4 nimble enough to run quite happily on the netbook, even with 3D bling such as the desktop cube enabled.
Edited 2009-04-20 12:35 UTC
Member since:2006-01-27
Even if it's not functionally necessary, manufacturers 'need' it to remain competitive. Especially if they're going to compete in the same price market.
PDAs began using 3D acceleration over five years ago, so it shouldn't be too much to expect from a mini-laptop today.
Edited 2009-04-20 16:09 UTC
Member since:2006-01-18
Intel is miles and miles ahead in that regard.
ARM needs a fully supported 3D capable software stack or their efforts will just die really fast.
Just my .02€
There is always Nvidia who can help out with an integrated graphics core. Btw. Intel on the other hand is miles away from producing a decent processor even remotely in the area of power consumption the current arm processors are...
Member since:2005-07-07
Intel is miles and miles ahead in that regard.
ARM needs a fully supported 3D capable software stack or their efforts will just die really fast.
Just my .02€
Why? Do you think people are going to be doing graphics intensive work on a tiny screen with a tiny keyboard? People aren't currently using netbooks for that kind of work and I don't suspect they will start anytime soon.
Member since:
2007-02-17
FTA:
http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/ubuntu-904-due-april-23-include...
A typical consumer might easily own one Intel CPU (in their desktop system) or perhaps two (a second one in their laptop) and up to four or five ARM CPUs. None of the ARM CPUs will be running Microsoft software.
No doubt it might come as a rude shock to Wintel followers to realise that the Windows/Intel/AMD/x86 architecture is well out-numbered in the actual real world.
Member since:2006-01-02
Member since:2007-02-17
What is it with you and Microsoft? Kickbacks?
Less functional, less compatible, way less choice, locked-in data formats, harder to find and more expensive than the plenty of freedom software out there not made by Microsoft and designed for ARM devices.
Edited 2009-04-21 07:08 UTC
Member since:2007-02-17
I have had a change of mind on this, and I am now going to treat your question seriously, as if you did not know why a person who has an interest in cosumer rights might not like Microsoft's behaviour.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20090421111327711
It is only a quick top-level summary (in 31 pages!) of Microsoft's anti-consumer, anti-competition, anti-free-market past acts.
This text speaks rather well toward addressing your question. The text is from a European semi-government organisation whose remit appears to be to promote market competition through interoperability:
http://www.ecis.eu/
Edited 2009-04-22 00:16 UTC
Member since:2006-01-02
ECIS is a lobbying organization. It is by no means part of any European government. I haven't yet read your groklaw link (and I'm not particularly hopeful about its link to objective reality on the basis of other things I've read there), but I'll give it a look soon.
Member since:2007-02-17
Although "semi-government" means "not actually a government, but a related organisation" ... you are right, ECIS is not even semi-government:
http://www.ecis.eu/about/index.html
It still has an entirely valid charter and interest, however ... in a free market, equipment made by different companies is SUPPOSED to be interoperable, after the fashion that different TVs from different makers can all receive and display the same broadcast transmission ... so also is it SUPPOSED to be the case with web content and web client machines. Hence the valid reason for existence of groups like ECIS.
The Groklaw link merely publishes (with permission) the text of the ECIS report.
Given the fact that the Groklaw article merely publishes the report, I cannot see how the Groklaw article can be considered anything other than objective reality.
Edited 2009-04-23 02:59 UTC
Member since:2007-02-17
BTW, here is the Title and Table of Contents of the ECIS report as quoted on Groklaw:
A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm
March 31, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................... ..1
II. MICROSOFT'S HISTORY OF ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT .................................3
A. Microsoft's Campaign To Destroy DR-DOS ..........................................................3
B. Microsoft's Anticompetitive Per Processor License Fees .......................................5
C. Microsoft's Retaliation And Price Discrimination Against IBM ............................6
D. Microsoft's Organized Collective Boycott Against Intel ........................................7
E. Microsoft's Elimination Of Word Perfect ...............................................................7
F. Microsoft's Deceptive WISE Software Program.....................................................9
G. Microsoft's Elimination Of Netscape ....................................................................10
H. Microsoft's Attempts To Extinguish Java .............................................................14
I. Microsoft's Elimination Of Rival Media Players ..................................................16
J. Microsoft's Campaign Against Rival Server Operating Systems..........................18
III. MICROSOFT CONTINUES TO ENGAGE IN ANTICOMPETITIVE CONDUCT ......19
A. Microsoft's Failure To Comply With The Final Judgment ...................................20
B. Microsoft's Campaign of Patent FUD against Linux and Open Source Software.............................................................. .......................23
C. Microsoft's Ongoing Misconduct Has Sparked Further European Commission Investigations .........................................23
IV. MICROSOFT'S FALSE PROMISES OF INTEROPERABILITY ..................................24
V. MICROSOFT'S MONOPOLIES HAVE HARMED CONSUMERS ..............................25
A. Microsoft's Operating System Monopoly Has Harmed Consumers .....................25
B. Microsoft's Office Monopoly Has Harmed Consumers........................................26
C. Microsoft's Web Browser Monopoly Has Harmed Consumers ............................28
VI. CONCLUSION............................................................ ...31
Given that your handle is "PlatformAgnostic", I thought this topic would be of particular interest to you.
Edited 2009-04-23 03:22 UTC
Member since:
2006-05-19
Actually worried about 3D performance on an ARMbook? You are kidding, right? These are not gaming rigs. You might want to re-think what these $120 machines can do. Think web surfing, e-mail and skype. 80-90% of what most people do with their computers anyway. These will not be desktop replacements. Heck, they are not even laptop replacements. They are cool though and a lot of people will buy them.
Microsoft and Intel are at a disadvantage in this low end market as their business models require a larger profit margin.
Member since:2007-02-17
Microsoft and Intel are at a disadvantage in this low end market as their business models require a larger profit margin.
It doesn't matter anyway. There are many solutions for 3D accelerated graphics on ARM at the low end ... even as low-end as mobile phones.
Member since:2006-01-04
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:
2008-05-26
Member since:2007-03-13
Member since:2005-08-18
Strangely enough yes, even though hardly anyone actually know how big an inch actually. It's all just some vague "X inches is larger than Y inches" thing.
no we don't.
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2006-01-27
Member since:2006-01-02
Member since:
2005-08-26
Seriously, been there, done that.
There wasn't a market for an ARM powered netbook last year, there isn't one this year.
The issue is integration with that bigger computer you lug around.
Netbooks need to outright replace the primary functionality of multiple devices, rather than augment them, if they're to truly become relevant. Otherwise, they're just underpowered sub-notebooks.
Attractive underpowered sub-notebooks, but only underpowered sub-notebooks. I've yet to see one in person that's not running XP.
Member since:2006-01-18
There wasn't a market for an ARM powered netbook last year, there isn't one this year.
The issue is integration with that bigger computer you lug around.
Netbooks need to outright replace the primary functionality of multiple devices, rather than augment them, if they're to truly become relevant. Otherwise, they're just underpowered sub-notebooks.
Attractive underpowered sub-notebooks, but only underpowered sub-notebooks. I've yet to see one in person that's not running XP.
Ok lets look at the whole thing entirely different. What is possible with ARM, flat notebooks without any fan whatsover, a fully working standby and sleep mode running for 10 hours straight around the same speed as Intel currently delivers with their ATOM. With additional graphics hardware even full hd theoretically would be possible. Of course there is a market for those things. Because face it, the current Atom based hardware simply is junk dropped onto the people...
Many people are happy to have a machine for web surfing and email and they probably will be even happier if this machine is absolutely fanless and runs 10-15 hours straight on one loading cycle!
Member since:2008-10-07
There is a market for it. I am waiting for those to come up and order a couple of them. Come on.. for 300$ I'll get two of them and they wont come with Windows for a change and with 20+ hours battery life. I mean..seriously, it's almost like buying full blown computers for the price of candy bars, and you can carry them in your bagpack like mere books.
Member since:
2008-07-15
That the experience of a device makes or breaks a product. The average consumer isn't going to care if it's using an ARM processor (I'm a geek, so I would care, but anyway). What they'll notice is the quiet operation, the very long battery life... but these may not be enough. User experience with the device's functions are also of prime importance, and if an OEM mucks it up by making the same mistakes as they did with Linux on the Atom-based netbooks, the fact that it runs on an ARM won't mean anything. I'd take an Atom running WinXP over an ARM running that god awful Xandros or Linpus any day, for example, and I don't even like Windows at all.
Bottom line, the entire package needs to be a tight piece of functionality. ARM is getting a bit overconfident at this point, they seem to think that just because it runs an ARM chip it will sell to the masses. However, if the os on the device is buggy, out of date, and a general all-around pita then that machine will flop.
Member since:2007-02-17
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8335306746.html
Member since:
2006-09-30
One of the selected GSoC projects is an ARM port
http://www.haiku-os.org/gsoc2009_announced_students
Member since:2005-07-06