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

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

It's not that big of a deal. We're all smart in here, we can figure it out.

"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."

"ARM-based CPUsâ€"first introduced in 1985â€"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."

ARM needs a fully supported 3D capable software stack or their efforts will just die really fast.

???

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.

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.

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

and we measure bookcases in feet not in metres.

Why would you need hardware 3d on a netbook?

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€

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.

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

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.

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

"AMD Releases R600/700 3D Documentation
Posted by Michael Larabel on January 26, 2009"

"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."

"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."

"AMD Pushes Out New R600/700 3D Code
Published on April 18, 2009
Written by Michael Larabel"

Just linking to random stuff doesn't prove your point

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.

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

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€

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.

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.

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