Linked by fran on Thu 21st Apr 2011 22:05 UTC
Intel "Intel has confirmed that it has received the Android 3.0 Honeycomb code from Google, and that it is 'actively' working on porting the tablet-centric platform to run on x86 chips like its Atom processors."
Order by: Score:
meego
by vivainio on Thu 21st Apr 2011 22:40 UTC
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26

Before people start moaning about Intel's commitment to MeeGo in light of this - porting to Android does not mean Intel would be any less committed to MeeGo. They are in the business of selling chips, and any platform they can run is a boost for the bottom line.

Reply Score: 6

RE: meego
by robojerk on Thu 21st Apr 2011 23:00 UTC in reply to "meego"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

But what about Intel's commitment to Windows?

/s

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: meego
by dvhh on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 02:27 UTC in reply to "RE: meego"
dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

MS is already cheating them by porting windows 8 to arm ;) .
Plus .Net was already a pretty good jab in the groin for intel.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: meego
by JAlexoid on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 13:17 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: meego"
JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Well... Come back when the full MS.NET runtime works on something else than x86 or Itanium. Win8 in alpha/beta/whatever does not count.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: meego
by dvhh on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 16:07 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: meego"
dvhh Member since:
2006-03-20

The compact and micro framework are designed for small system, however they are not that far from the full framework (mentioning mono running fine on linux arm would probably be cheating)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: meego
by twitterfire on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 16:12 UTC in reply to "RE: meego"
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11

But what about Intel's commitment to Windows?

/s


What about MS trying to screw Intel by providing Windows 8 for Arm?

And we have Nvidia's project Denver which tries to build a desktop/performance CPU from ARM architecture.

If major software vendors will move to .NET like MS pushes them to, I would fear about what will happen in the next future if I were in Intel's or AMD's shoes.

Edited 2011-04-23 16:20 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: meego
by ebasconp on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 01:08 UTC in reply to "meego"
ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

as i am seeing the things, meego will be a second class citizen in any platform it will run... apple has full commitment to its iOS and to MacOSX, Microsoft to Windows, Google to Android, but nobody seems to put all their meego cards on the table... let's see how this evolves... but, though i never developed any single line for meego, i wanted to write some stuff for it but... i'm not interested anymore... i think a lot of developers are in the same position as me.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: meego
by vivainio on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 10:08 UTC in reply to "RE: meego"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

as i am seeing the things, meego will be a second class citizen in any platform it will run


Predicting can be hard, especially prediction of future ;-).

let's see how this evolves.


Yeah, this is the key. What we need to see is a mature release of MeeGo tablet UX, and apps will start coming.

The key to having apps on MeeGo is that the apps won't be meego specific; rather, they will work on Ubuntu (or any other "normal" Linux), Harmattan, Symbian... This is why we want MeeGo to succeed. It's the last, best hope for Linux on mobile. [yeah, I still don't count Android there).

.. but, though i never developed any single line for meego, i wanted to write some stuff for it but... i'm not interested anymore... i think a lot of developers are in the same position as me.


Then again, a lot of developers are not in that position.

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: meego
by fran on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 13:48 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: meego"
fran Member since:
2010-08-06

as it stand things are pointing towards a meego critical mass from the Chinese and Korean market first then sweeping the globe.
From what you are saying about it's applications being Ubuntu/Linux crossplatform I really really do hope it happens for Meego.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/04/meego-finding-some-love...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: meego
by Vanders on Tue 26th Apr 2011 09:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: meego"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

The key to having apps on MeeGo is that the apps won't be meego specific; rather, they will work on Ubuntu (or any other "normal" Linux), Harmattan, Symbian...


Then where is the advantage of developing for MeeGo? I'd have thought OS/2 would have been enough of a warning for anyone who was contemplating developing a new OS using "agnostic" APIs.

It's the last, best hope for Linux on mobile. [yeah, I still don't count Android there).


Do you count webOS? HP are committed to having webOS on everything from mobiles to desktops. (Disclaimer: I work for HP).

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: meego
by vivainio on Tue 26th Apr 2011 19:58 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: meego"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


Then where is the advantage of developing for MeeGo?


If you want to target devices based on MeeGo, you write to MeeGo api.

I'd have thought OS/2 would have been enough of a warning for anyone who was contemplating developing a new OS using "agnostic" APIs.


Is OpenGL ES yet another example of how these agnostic apis don't work?


Do you count webOS? HP are committed to having webOS on everything from mobiles to desktops. (Disclaimer: I work for HP).


Yes, I actually count WebOS, thanks for the reminder ;) . WebOS is indeed built on "real" Linux stack, but perhaps puts too much weight on their own web libs.

HP should just join MeeGo, and provide their own proprietary UX / features on top of meego core.

Disclaimer: I work for Nokia.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Kroc
by Kroc on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 06:29 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Coming Soon!

Tablets so hot they burn your hands!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Kroc
by Neolander on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 07:42 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Coming Soon!

Tablets so hot they burn your hands!

On any Atom netbook I've played with, the device remained pretty cold for typical use (well, tepid under load, but these days phones do that too).

Myself, I think that successful x86 tablets could be good news for OS developers. If it's not only about CPUs and the x86/IBM PC culture comes with it, it means that we could get easily hackable devices where running a new OS doesn't require bypassing dozens of manufacturer-specific locks (preferably is just a matter of plugging an USB drive in and holding a button during boot) and where text I/O is not something so high-level it's hardware specific.

Edited 2011-04-22 07:55 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by Kroc
by viton on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 17:39 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Kroc"
viton Member since:
2005-08-09

Both netbooks I have (EEE900 + HP Mini) became pretty hot and noisy after some usage, especially if one is laying on the bed.
My Tegra2 "smartbook" doesn't even has ventilation holes and only a spot on the rear side is warm on full load.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Kroc
by vivainio on Fri 22nd Apr 2011 10:10 UTC in reply to "Comment by Kroc"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Coming Soon!

Tablets so hot they burn your hands!


I have ExoPC (one I got from Intel AppUp labs). It has a fan and warms up, but never gets 'hot'.

I'd probably take a large tablet (like exopc, with 12" screen) with intel cpu preferably (with special eye on future generations), and a small one (5" / 7") w/ ARM for extended mobile use when travelling.

Edited 2011-04-22 10:10 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Bah
by twitterfire on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 16:11 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

It would have been way nicer if Intel announced instead that the next gen of Atom CPU is going to be as power hungry as an ARM CPU and that they are going to make it SOC instead of a discrete solution.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Bah
by Neolander on Sat 23rd Apr 2011 16:39 UTC in reply to "Bah"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

SOC = bundling more and more in a single big chip, kind of like a microcontroller, right ?

In that case, Intel are clearly moving in that direction, with their CPUs "eating" more and more traditionally external functionality (Northbridge, GPU...)

Edited 2011-04-23 16:45 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Bah
by vivainio on Sun 24th Apr 2011 09:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Bah"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

SOC = bundling more and more in a single big chip, kind of like a microcontroller, right ?


As wikipedia puts it:

The contrast with a microcontroller is one of degree. Microcontrollers typically have under 100K of RAM (often just a few KBytes) and often really are single-chip-systems; whereas the term SoC is typically used with more powerful processors, capable of running software such as the desktop versions of Windows and Linux, which need external memory chips (flash, RAM) to be useful, and which are used with various external peripherals.

Reply Score: 2