Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Mon 20th Apr 2009 08:46 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems 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.
Order by: Score:
$110-$120
by B12 Simon on Mon 20th Apr 2009 09:01 UTC
B12 Simon
Member since:
2006-11-08

While I'd not consider a $110-$120 netbook "an almost disposable commodity" there would definitely be a market for giving them to the kids (no more sticky fingers on your shiny new Thinkpad/Macbook/Viao) and as a secondary machine for checking mail on holiday.

Reply Score: 3

does OSNews have any policies for content?
by Beta on Mon 20th Apr 2009 09:22 UTC
Beta
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?

Reply Score: 5

Thom_Holwerda 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.

Reply Score: 4

Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=unit+converter&btnG=Zoe...

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? ;)

Reply Score: 2

B12 Simon Member since:
2006-11-08

Like it or not, computer bits have Imperial measurements, whether it's a 3.5"/5.25" drive, 19" rack or a 24" monitor.

That's not some mistake of this site or its users, it's the entire industry.

Reply Score: 4

judgen Member since:
2006-07-12

Allthough the small parts inside the computer is measured in meters. (micrometers and nanometers at the moment but who knows what the future brings?)

Reply Score: 3

weildish 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. ;)

Reply Score: 2

ohbrilliance Member since:
2005-07-07

I disagree. I'd much rather have the figure given in the originally quoted unit, even if it's less familiar to me. If the board was in fact built to a 3"x3" spec then that's the most apt description, not ~7.62x~7.62cm

Edited 2009-04-20 09:39 UTC

Reply Score: 7

Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

I disagree. I'd much rather have the figure given in the originally quoted unit, even if it's less familiar to me. If the board was in fact built to a 3"x3" spec then that's the most apt description, not ~7.62x~7.62cm


The assumption on your part is that it wasn’t 8×8cm and had been imperialised for the interviewer.

Reply Score: 2

MamiyaOtaru Member since:
2005-11-11

As opposed to your assumption that it was?

Reply Score: 3

Bobthearch 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?

Reply Score: 2

SOC? No problem for Intel
by pica on Mon 20th Apr 2009 09:36 UTC
pica
Member since:
2005-07-10

Intel has all the technology needed to build a System On a Chip. Intel produces WiFi NICs, Ethernet NICs, Display Adapters, North-/Southbridges, etc. I guess it's a matter of weeks for Intel to ramp a SOC.

Reply Score: 4

RE: SOC? No problem for Intel
by NexusCrawler on Mon 20th Apr 2009 10:14 UTC in reply to "SOC? No problem for Intel "
NexusCrawler 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!

Reply Score: 4

superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

I agree that ARM seems over-confident. They are imho way too late to the party - a year ago, customers accepted linux on a netbook, as it was a different device. MS' marketing techniques have pushed XP on most netbooks, and customers are getting used to that.

Reply Score: 3

RE: SOC? No problem for Intel
by puenktchen on Mon 20th Apr 2009 13:47 UTC in reply to "SOC? No problem for Intel "
puenktchen 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

Reply Score: 4

ARM should invest more in Open Source
by kragil on Mon 20th Apr 2009 09:49 UTC
kragil
Member since:
2006-01-04

Their CPUs might have quite good Linux support, but their graphic chips ... don't get me started.

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€

Reply Score: 7

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

???

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.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 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

Reply Score: 2

kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

A few months???

The AMD specs have been out for years now and the driver is still very rudimentary.(Let's not talk about VIA.)

Just linking to random stuff does not prove your point.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

A few months??? The AMD specs have been out for years now and the driver is still very rudimentary.


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

"AMD Releases R600/700 3D Documentation
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:
"This code will allow open-source 3D acceleration on the Radeon HD 2000, 3000, and 4000 series of graphics cards. Those using the Radeon X1000 series (R500) or earlier have already had open-source ATI 3D support for a while."


The status of the corresponding open source 3D driver for the Radeon HD 2000, 3000, and 4000, from the links I gave:

"Over the coming weeks and months this R600/700 3D support should mature to be able to run games that are compatible with the Mesa stack."


This was the status as at ...
"AMD Pushes Out New R600/700 3D Code
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.

Just linking to random stuff doesn't prove your point


Failing to read and understand linked stuff (which BTW was entirely relevant) doesn't prove yours.

Edited 2009-04-21 03:51 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Why would you need hardware 3d on a netbook?

Reply Score: 2

dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

Expose like effects and similar UI enhancements.

Reply Score: 3

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Why would you need hardware 3d on a netbook?


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

Reply Score: 4

Bobthearch 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

Reply Score: 3

werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

Their CPUs might have quite good Linux support, but their graphic chips ... don't get me started.

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...

Reply Score: 1

abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Their CPUs might have quite good Linux support, but their graphic chips ... don't get me started.

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.

Reply Score: 2

ARM is the most prolifuc CPU architecture
by lemur2 on Mon 20th Apr 2009 10:08 UTC
lemur2
Member since:
2007-02-17

FTA:

"We're on a run rate of 1.2-1.3 billion units a quarter. ARM towers above the others with Linux because it's in the small systems. We don't think a lot about systems with Linux on them. You wouldn't believe what Linux is in. There's an entire ecosystem that you don't think about."


http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/ubuntu-904-due-april-23-include...

"ARM-based CPUs–first introduced in 1985–are now the most prolific CPUs in the world. Over one billion new mobile phones are sold each year, and 98% of them use at least one ARM-based CPU on the inside. They are also found in iPods, hard drives, routers, and all kinds of low-power, high-speed computational devices."


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.

Reply Score: 5

PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

What is it with you and Microsoft? Did Windows eat your term paper, or kick your dog?

In fact, Windows is already on ARM in CE form and there's plenty of software out there made by Microsoft and designed for ARM devices.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

What is it with you and Microsoft? Did Windows eat your term paper, or kick your dog?


What is it with you and Microsoft? Kickbacks?

In fact, Windows is already on ARM in CE form and there's plenty of software out there made by Microsoft and designed for ARM devices.


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

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

What is it with you and Microsoft? Did Windows eat your term paper, or kick your dog?


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

Reply Score: 2

PlatformAgnostic 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.

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

ECIS is a lobbying organization. It is by no means part of any European government.


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.

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.


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

Reply Score: 2

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

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.


BTW, here is the Title and Table of Contents of the ECIS report as quoted on Groklaw:
Microsoft
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

Reply Score: 2

3D? who cares?
by bolomkxxviii on Mon 20th Apr 2009 11:04 UTC
bolomkxxviii
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.

Reply Score: 3

RE: 3D? who cares?
by lemur2 on Mon 20th Apr 2009 11:57 UTC in reply to "3D? who cares?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

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.


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.

Reply Score: 2

RE: 3D? who cares?
by kragil on Mon 20th Apr 2009 13:11 UTC in reply to "3D? who cares?"
kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

3D is more than just games .. all new and coming UIs require _GREAT_ openGL drivers.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: 3D? who cares?
by superstoned on Mon 20th Apr 2009 14:15 UTC in reply to "RE: 3D? who cares?"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

Indeed, and from what I understand the OpenGL support of ARM sucks balls. IOW forget about any 3D on it for the forseeable future.

Reply Score: 1

Inches is what the industry uses
by 3rdalbum on Mon 20th Apr 2009 11:13 UTC
3rdalbum
Member since:
2008-05-26

It doesn't matter if the motherboard is 3x3 inches rather than whatever centimetres. Even in metric countries, we still measure screen size in inches, we talk about hard drive sizes in inches, and we measure bookcases in feet not in metres.

Reply Score: 1

Calipso Member since:
2007-03-13

I can understand screen sizes and such, but book cases? in feet really?

Reply Score: 3

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

we still measure screen size in inches, we talk about hard drive sizes in inches


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.

and we measure bookcases in feet not in metres.


no we don't.

Reply Score: 5

superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

I know an inch is about 2.5 cm ;-)

More serious, these days screensizes are becoming more and more cm here in the Netherlands. I actually have to turn them into " to be able to compare them with my monitor @home ;-)

Reply Score: 3

Bobthearch Member since:
2006-01-27

It's all just some vague "X inches is larger than Y inches" thing.

That's all you really need to know. ;)

The same way that Americans were able to figure out that 2 liters is larger than 1 liter. It's not magic... ;)

Reply Score: 2

PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

After about a liter, I can't really tell the difference. Can you?

Reply Score: 2

Palm Folio, Anyone?
by bryanv on Mon 20th Apr 2009 15:22 UTC
bryanv
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.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Palm Folio, Anyone?
by werpu on Mon 20th Apr 2009 15:57 UTC in reply to "Palm Folio, Anyone?"
werpu Member since:
2006-01-18

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.


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!

Reply Score: 3

RE: Palm Folio, Anyone?
by thelastdodo on Mon 20th Apr 2009 16:55 UTC in reply to "Palm Folio, Anyone?"
thelastdodo 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.

Reply Score: 1

Hope ARM Realizes...
by darknexus on Mon 20th Apr 2009 18:19 UTC
darknexus
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.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Hope ARM Realizes...
by lemur2 on Tue 21st Apr 2009 03:29 UTC in reply to "Hope ARM Realizes..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

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.


http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8335306746.html

Reply Score: 2

Watch out for Haiku :)
by mmu_man on Tue 21st Apr 2009 13:06 UTC
mmu_man
Member since:
2006-09-30

One of the selected GSoC projects is an ARM port ;)
http://www.haiku-os.org/gsoc2009_announced_students

Reply Score: 2

RE: Watch out for Haiku :)
by ModeenF on Wed 22nd Apr 2009 06:54 UTC in reply to "Watch out for Haiku :)"
ModeenF Member since:
2005-07-06

And for that reason I'm waiting to get a new netbook and perhaps my next netbook will be a ARM one running Haiku ;) . My Aspire One just loves Haiku ;)

Reply Score: 1