Intel’s woes are far from over. Pat Gelsinger, the company’s CEO, has announced that Intel’s chipmaking business will be spun off and turned into a separate company.

A subsidiary structure will unlock important benefits. It provides our external foundry customers and suppliers with clearer separation and independence from the rest of Intel. Importantly, it also gives us future flexibility to evaluate independent sources of funding and optimize the capital structure of each business to maximize growth and shareholder value creation.

There is no change to our Intel Foundry leadership team, which continues to report to me. We will also establish an operating board that includes independent directors to govern the subsidiary. This supports our continued focus on driving greater transparency, optimization and accountability across the business.

↫ Pat Gelsinger

This is a big move, and illustrated the difficulties Intel is facing. Its foundry business lost $7 billion last year, and it’s cutting 15% of its workforce – 15000 people – indicating it needs to do something to turn the ship around. Intel is also pausing construction on two additional plants in Europe, but will continue its expansion efforts in the United States. Bitter note is that Intel received a massive cash injection from the US Biden administration, yet then proceeds to fire 15000 people.

Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.

FreeBSD 13.4 has been released. This is already the fifth release in the FreeBSD 13 series, and contains the usual set of security fixes, driver updates, important updated packages, like openssh, LLVM, clang, and so on. If you’re running FreeBSD 13, you already know how to upgrade, and if you want to start using FreeBSD 13, here’s the download page.

We all know about the Desktop Publishing revolution that the first Macs and their PostScript LaserWriter printers brought in the late 1980s, but many have now forgotten the Desktop Video revolution that followed in the next decade. At its heart was support for multimedia in Apple’s QuickTime.

QuickTime isn’t a single piece of software, or even an API in Classic Mac OS, but a whole architecture to support almost any media format you could conceive of. It defines container and file formats for multiple media types, forming the basis for the MPEG-4 standard, extensible encoding and decoding of a wide variety of media using Codecs, and more.

↫ Howard Oakley

As a Windows users before I switched to the Mac somewhere in 2003 or 2004 or so, I mostly associated QuickTime with an annoying piece of crapware I sometimes had to install to watch videos, despite my Windows installation being perfectly capable of playing a whole slew of video codecs just fine. To make matters worse, Apple eventually started forcing Windows users to also install their auto-update tool that ran in the background, which would occasionally just… Install stuff without your permission.

Of course, QuickTime was a whole lot more than that, especially on the Mac, where it was simply a core technology of the Mac operating system and the name of the built-in video player. It also served as underpinnings for a whole slew of related technologies, from movie editors like iMovie to the QuickTime streaming tools included in Mac OS X Server, so odds are that somehow, somewhere, you’ve used QuickTime in your life time.

I’m not entirely ashamed to admit I had to check if QuickTime was still part of macOS today – I haven’t actively used macOS since, I think, the Snow Leopard days in 2009 – but it obviously has been sunset quite a while ago in favour of AVFoundation, which macOS still uses today.

Last week, Julio Merino published an article I wish someone had written ages ago: a fair, unbiased look at the differences between Windows NT in its original form and UNIX roughly at the time of the initial releases of Windows NT. Merino, who has a long career in tech and has made contributions to several operating systems, does a great job cutting through the fanboyism and decades’ worth of conventional wisdom, arriving at the following conclusion that I think many of us here will share even without diving into the great depth of his article.

NT was groundbreaking technology when it launched. As I presented above, many of the features we take for granted today in systems design were present in NT since its inception, whereas almost all other Unix systems had to gain those features slowly over time. As a result, such features don’t always integrate seamlessly with Unix philosophies.

Today, however, it’s not clear to me that NT is truly “more advanced” than, say, Linux or FreeBSD. It is true that NT had more solid design principles at the onset and more features that its contemporary operating systems, but nowadays… the differences are blurry. Yes, NT is advanced, but not significantly more so than modern Unixes.

What I find disappointing is that, even though NT has all these solid design principles in place… bloat in the UI doesn’t let the design shine through. The sluggishness of the OS even on super-powerful machines is painful to witness and might even lead to the demise of this OS.

↫ Julio Merino

You should definitely read the whole thing, and not just the conclusion, as it will give you some great insight into some of the differences between the two approaches, and how the UNIX and Windows NT worlds learned from each other and grew together. It’s well-written, easy to read, and contains a ton of information and details about especially Windows NT most people are probably not aware of.

Reading through the article helped my crystallise a set of thoughts I’ve been having about the future of Windows, and in particular, the future of Windows NT as a short-hand for the kernel, lower-level frameworks, and everything else below the graphical layer. I think there’s a major change coming to Windows NT, something so big and unheard of it’s going to be the most defining moment in Windows NT history since its very first release. There’s a few facts that lie at the root of my conclusion.

First, ever since the very beginning, Windows NT has been developed in roughly the same way: behind closed doors by a group of specialists inside Microsoft, and every now and then we got a massive dump of new code in the form of a major Windows release. It’s only recently that Microsoft has started taking a more rolling release approach to Windows development, with smaller updates peppered throughout the year, with different release branches users can subscribe to.

Second, despite many of us almost equating Microsoft with Windows – or perhaps with Windows and Office – the reality of it is that Windows hasn’t been the primary driver for revenue for Microsoft for a while now. In Microsoft’s fiscal year of 2023, Windows made up just 10% of the company’s total revenue that year, which amounts to $22 billion out of a total revenue of $211 billion. Azure alone is almost four times as large at $80 billion, and even LinkedIn – yes, LinkedIn – is good for $15 billion in revenue, making Windows only about a third more profitable than the most soulless social network in human history.

Third, despite Windows’ decreasing revenue share, the operating system is becoming ever larger in scope. Not only does it need to cover the literally infinite possible combinations of x86 hardware in both the desktop/laptop and server space, it now also needs to cover what is surely going to be a growing market for ARM hardware, starting with laptops, but surely expanding to desktops and servers, too. Microsoft needs to foot the bill for all of this development, and for how much longer can the company justify spending an inordinate amount of money on a massive army of Windows developers, when the revenue they bring in is such a small part of the company, and a part that’s decreasing every year, to boot?

Fourth, the competition Windows faces is surprisingly strong. Not only are macOS, Chrome OS, and even the Linux desktop doing better than ever, mobile computing is also competing with Windows, and that’s a space Microsoft is simply not present in at all. This is especially pressing in the developing world, where often people’s first and only computing experience is mobile – through Android, mostly – and Microsoft and Windows simply don’t play any role.

Given these facts, there’s only one reasonable course of action for Microsoft.

I think the company is going to address all of these issues by releasing large parts of Windows NT as open source. I base this on a gut feeling bourne out of the above facts, and not on any form of insider information, and there is a 99.9% chance that I am wholly, completely, and utterly wrong. Still, deep down, I feel like releasing Windows as open source makes the most sense considering the challenges the operating system and its parent company are facing.

You and I are going to witness Windows NT’s source code being published as open source on GitHub by Microsoft within 5-7 years, accompanied by an open governance model wherein contributions are welcomed and encouraged. Even if such a step will not be taken by Microsoft, I am convinced that, in the future, when today’s employees and executives write and publish their memoirs, it will contain a lot of discourse on the very serious consideration that took place within the company in the past to do so.

You can quote me on this. And then laugh at me when it inevitable turns out I’m wrong.

It’s one of the most pervasive common wisdoms shared all over the web, no matter where you go – it’s one of those things everybody seems to universally agree on: Chrome will absolutely devastate your battery life on the Mac, and you should really be using Safari, because Apple’s special integration magic pixie dust sprinkles ensures Safari sips instead of gulps electricity. Whether you read random forum posters, Apple PR spokespeople, or Apple’s own executives on stage during events, this wisdom is hard to escape.

Is it true, though?

Well, Matt Birchler decided to do something entirely revolutionary and entirely unheard of: a benchmark. Back in the olden days of yore, we would run benchmarks to test the claims from companies and their PR departments, and Birchler decided to dust off this old technique and develop a routine to put the Chrome battery claims to the test. After 3 days of continuous testing on a freshly installed 14” MacBook Pro with an M2 Pro processor and 16 GB RAM running the latest stable releases of both browsers, Birchler came to some interesting conclusions.

In my 3-hour tests, Safari consumed 18.67% of my battery each time on average, and Chrome averaged 17.33% battery drain. That works out to about 9% less battery drain from Chrome than Safari. Yes, you read that right, I found Chrome was easier on my battery than Safari.

While I did experience some variability in each 3 hour test run, Chrome came out on top in 5 of the 6 direct comparisons.

↫ Matt Birchler

His methodology seems quite sound and a good representation of what most laptop users will use their browser for: YouTube, social media, a few news websites, and editing a Google Doc, in a 20 minute loop that was repeated for three hours per test. Multiple of these three hour tests were then ran to counter variability. I highly doubt using different websites will radically change the results, but I obviously am curious to see a similar test ran on Windows and Linux, x86 and ARM, for a more complete picture that goes beyond just the Mac.

Conventional wisdom is sometimes wrong, and I think we have a classic case of that here. While there may have been a time in the past where Chrome on the Mac devastated battery life, it seems Chrome and Chromium engineers have closed the gap, and in some cases even beat Safari. Now, this doesn’t mean everybody should rush and switch to Chrome, since there are countless other reasons to use Safari over Chrome other than supposed battery life advantages.

With Apple PR arguing that alternative browser engines should not be allowed on iOS because Chrome would devastate iOS’ battery life, tests like these are more important than ever, and I hope we’re going to see more of them. Tech media always just seems to copy/paste whatever manufacturers and corporations claim without so much as a hint of skepticism, and this benchmark highlights the dangers of doing so, in case you didn’t already know believing corporations was a terribly idea.

Linus Torvalds just tagged the Linux 6.11 kernel as stable. There are many changes and new features in Linux 6.11 including numerous AMD CPU and GPU improvements, preparations for upcoming Intel platforms, initial block atomic write support for NVMe and SCSI drives, the DRM Panic infrastructure can now display a monochrome logo if desired, easier support for building Pacman kernel packages for Arch Linux, DeviceTree files for initial Snapdragon X1 laptops, and much more.

↫ Michael Larabel

Especially the Snapdragon stuff interests me, as I really want to move to ARM for my laptop needs at some point, and I’m obviously not going to be using Windows or macOS. I hope the bringup for the Snapdragon laptop chips is smooth sailing from here and picks up pace, because I’d hate for Linux to miss out on this transition. Qualcomm talked big game about supporting Linux properly, but it feels like they’re – what a surprise – not backing those words up with actions so far.

To empower tablet users to get more done, we’re enhancing freeform windowing, allowing them to run multiple apps simultaneously and resize windows for optimal multitasking. Today, we’re excited to share that desktop windowing on Android tablets is available in developer preview.

For app developers, the concept of Android apps running in freeform windows has already existed with solutions like Samsung DeX and ChromeOS. Updating your apps to support adaptive layouts, more robust multitasking, and adaptive inputs will ensure your apps work well on large screens across the Android ecosystem.

↫ Francesco Romano on the Android Developers Blog

The long-running saga of Google trying to develop proper freeform windowing support for Android seems to finally be bearing fruit. Countless attempts came and went, usually in developer releases, hidden behind flags, rarely, if ever talked about, but now it’s finally not only part of an Android beta release anyone with a Pixel Tablet can install and try out, Google is also openly talking about and touting it as a feature, so we might actually perhaps maybe see this in a non-beta release at some point.

The way it works is both surprising and rather unsurprising. Instead of the Apple approach, which seems to entail a deep disdain for traditional windowing, Google is pretty much embracing the things we expect a windowing system to have, from window titlebars with close and maximise widgets, to a traditional dock-like taskbar permanently available at the bottom of the screen. If you click or tap on a little downward arrow on the titlebar, you can choose options like displaying windows side-by-side, much like on Windows. A very welcome ‘feature’ is the ability to tear off Chrome tabs and turn them into their own windows, just like in a traditional desktop environment.

Google also opted for an interesting approach that reminds me somewhat of the “desktop” mode on Windows RT. Since Windows RT was ARM-based and entirely locked-down, the only classic Win32 applications you could run were those bundled with Windows as well as Microsoft Office. To access these, Windows RT would launch a full-screen tablet application that contained the entire traditional Windows desktop, and you’d run your classic Win32 applications in there.

Android’s new windowing system seems to be doing something similar: once you enter the freeform windowing mode, all future applications will also launch as windows. In the task switcher, however, they’re all contained within a single “desktop” entry that you can close if you want to. That desktop entry seems to take the shape of a live view of the “desktop”, including the various windows you have opened. This way, you can have a dedicated “desktop” with freeform windows alongside any fullscreen tablet applications you also happen to be running. It’s perhaps not the most integrated or elegant approach, but it’s dead-simple and easy to grasp.

This new windowing environment also provides application developers with the option of allowing multiple instances of a single application to be launched, say launching two text editor windows side-by-side. This seems to be a specific property developers need to enable, though, and considering Android’s tablet adoption history, that’s anything but a given at this point. Of course, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that applications need to be able to resize gracefully, too.

If you want to play with it, you’ll need a Pixel Tablet running Android 15 QPR1 Beta 2, or just use the simulator. I really hope this takes off and developers support the various APIs for optimal integration (I’m not getting my hopes up), since proper freeform windowing that doesn’t feel like an ugly, barely functional hack is something I’ve been wanting on Android for a long time.

The consequences of the massive CrowdStrike failure for Windows are slowly coming into focus. Microsoft recently held a security summit with some of the large security software vendors, and the company is making several rather vague promises about what it’s going to do to make sure an incident like CrowdStrike never happens again. A key part of these promises is the realisation that security software really shouldn’t be running in the kernel, and to make that possible, MIcrosoft will need to add several security features in userspace.

Both our customers and ecosystem partners have called on Microsoft to provide additional security capabilities outside of kernel mode which, along with SDP, can be used to create highly available security solutions. At the summit, Microsoft and partners discussed the requirements and key challenges in creating a new platform which can meet the needs of security vendors.

↫ David Weston at the Windows Blogs

This is easier said than done, as moving things from kernel to userspace tends to incur a performance penalty, as well as making it harder to detect software with bad intentions early enough. Microsoft is going to have do some serious reworking of both the kernel and userspace when it comes to security before it’ll be able to completely close up the kernel and make it impossible for security software to mess around in kernelspace. Microsoft doesn’t offer any concrete steps or measures quite yet, so we’ll have to wait and see just how far they’re willing to go.

There’s really not much else to say at this point – empty platitudes, vague promises, and tons of marketing speak don’t secure an operating system, after all.

This summer, I embarked on a side project to create a brand-new Palm OS game, and after less than two months of intermittent coding, I’m excited to announce that it’s ready to be released to the public!

↫ Captain’s Quarters

The game in question is a top-down minigolf game, and works on devices running Palm OS 3.5 and higher, in both monochrome and colour, and there’s high-resolution support for devices running Palm OS 5.0 and higher. Sadly, my own Palm OS devices were all drained of battery so I couldn’t quickly load it up and play it on real hardware in time for this post (rest assured, my T|X is currently charging), but you can play it in your browser if you want to. Like any other top-down minigolf game, it’s simple and fun to play.

The game’s creator, whose real name I can’t find so I’ll just refer to them by their blog’s name Captain’s Quarters, also wrote a published a post about the process of developing a Palm OS game in 2024. Especially the section on what is needed to code for Palm OS today is important if you’re also interested in picking this up.

The best news is that developing a Palm OS game can be done on modern hardware, that saves me a lot of time not having to deal with virtual machines or having to set up an old PC running Linux.

For getting a working compiler, I used prc-tools-remix, which is the same old compiler as in the old days, but it’s updated to work on a modern day Linux or OS X system.

↫ Captain’s Quarters

People in general are often oblivious to just how advanced and capable both Palm OS and Windows PocketPC PDAs really were – most people never had one – and even more people are oblivious to just how vibrant the gaming scene on Palm OS was. My Palm OS devices were some of the best gaming handhelds I’ve ever had, and my love for jewel-matching games still goes strong today on Android, but it all started on Palm OS, the original mobile home of the original Bejeweled. Palm OS games got me through quite a few boring lectures and classes in university.

And the hits just keep on coming. After buying an ad tech company and working with Facebook to weaken Firefox’ privacy features, Mozilla is now integrating AI chatbots straight into Firefox with the recent release of Firefox 130. People are understandably big mad about this, and as such the calls for switching to alternatives is growing stronger. Considering the only true alternative to Firefox is Chrome and its various skins, those of us looking to send Mozilla a message are kind of relegated to trying out Firefox skins instead.

Switching to what are essentially “Firefox distros” to collectively try and nudge Mozilla back to making more sensible decisions instead of AI hype chasing is an eminently reasonable one. There’s more reasons than just that. Part of the reason I use Firefox-based browsers rather than Chromium browsers is because I want to preserve some choice and diversity in browser engines. The existence of a choice of different Firefox derived browsers may allow space for experimentation in designing better browsers. In Chromium land, Arc has shown that there’s an opportunity for quite radically rethinking how browsers work. Same for Orion in Mac/iOS-land.

This isn’t a detailed review of the different browsers, just a few comments and observations having tried them.

↫ Tom Morris

I have my reservations about using Firefox skins, mostly because no matter what you do, you’re still entirely dependent on the choices Mozilla makes during the development of the venerable browser. If Mozilla keeps deviating from the traditional goals more and more, the amount of work these Firefox skins need to perform to reign the browser back in will start to increase, and who knows if they have the manpower, experience, and skills to do so? More worryingly, will they be able to keep up with Mozilla’s release schedule, including important bugfixes and security patches?

My worries go beyond those basic things, though. Considerably fewer eyes will be going over any code changes these Firefox-based browsers make, and as recent history has shown us, infiltrating a small, understaffed open source project for nefarious purposes is a thing that happens. Another issue to consider is nebulous ownership of such Firefox versions, as are questions around who financially supports such efforts. Your browser is a massively important and crucial piece of software that holds and has access to a lot of your personal data, and you should be particularly careful about who owns your browser.

This is not to say each and every one of them is bad – just that you have to be careful about who you trust. Several Chrome skins, like Brave and Opera, have time and time again shown to be shady, untrustworthy companies pushing crypto bullshit, ripping off websites, have shady owners, and more – don’t use Brave, don’t use Opera – and there’s no guarantees the same won’t happen with Firefox skins riding the wave of unhappiness with Mozilla. Please be mindful.

I don’t have an answer for this issue, either – I just want to caution against throwing the browser out with the bath water and switching to a project you might not know a lot about.

With the recent Rust in Linux events in the last couple of days, it’s a good time to write up Rust in illumos. Both to spread the word a bit and also to set expectations for both sides (Rust and illumos/OpenIndiana devs) what is currently possible and what work would need to be invested to make things smooth. And also to let the Rust community know about what illumos people were talking about.

What most of the talk currently is about, are the technical details. But we must not leave the social aspects out of it. Software distributions are not made by lone walkers but by groups of people. Bringing in a new language means facilitating change. And that means there are more topics to discuss than just API design. We are talking about impacts on the whole software lifecycle.

↫ Till Wegmüller (Toasty)

I try to steer clear of all the Rust-related drama, mostly because it’s outside of my wheelhouse, but also because I don’t think anything I can highlight here will help anyone get anywhere or solve anything. In this particular case, there’s no drama, and it’s just a good ol’ discussion about what Rust as a programming language can contribute to the illumos community and code.

I can’t program so here my useful contributions end.

Earlier this year, I reviewed the excellent and unique MNT Reform laptop, an (almost) fully open source, very hackable laptop. MNT has just unveiled the upcoming follow-up to the Reform, called the Reform Next.

Being highly performant, modular, and upgradeable, MNT Reform Next gives you more freedom than any other laptop. Swap modules, print your own case, customize your keyboard. Since we are committed to open hardware, all sources are public.

While Classic MNT Reform is a portable device, we felt like a sleeker, more lightweight design would increase portability and make for a more flexible laptop.

↫ MNT website

The focus seems to have been on both performance and size, and I think the latter is especially important for a lot of people who might not have been too enamored with the original Reform’s chunky, brutalist design. The device has been made thinner by splitting the motherboard up into several connected, separate boards, that also happen to improve the repairability and upgradeability of the device. The battery pack has been redesigned for a smaller physical size, too, and the trackball option is no longer available – it’s trackpad-only.

The Reform Next is compatible with MNT’s latest processor module, the RK3588, and as such, packs a bigger punch. This SoC has four ARM Cortex-A76 cores up to 2.4 Ghz, and four power-efficient ARM Cortex-A55 cores up to 1.5 Ghz. This SoC is also available as an upgrade for the MNT Reform and the MNT Pocket Reform, and ships with either 16 or 32 GB of RAM and an ARM Mali G610 MP4 GPU.

Of course, the Reform Next will be as open as humanly possible, both software as well as hardware-wise, and it’s looking like a worthy successor to the MNT Reform. I’m incredibly delighted that MNT seems to have found a niche that works for them, and enabling them to keep developing and releasing hardware that goes against every trend in the industry, giving us entirely unique devices nobody else is making.

I had a chance to speak to Jack Huynh, AMD’s senior vice president and general manager of the Computing and Graphics Business Group, during IFA 2024 in a question and answer session. Due to speculation that AMD won’t launch flagship GPUs for its next-gen lineup, I pressed Huynh for information regarding the company’s plans for the high-end GPU market with the RDNA 4-powered Radeon RX 8000-series. His comments sketch out a plan focused specifically on gaining market share in the GPU market above all else, and this strategy deprioritizes chasing Nvidia’s highest-end gaming cards — at least for now.

↫ Paul Alcorn at Tom’s Hardware

Reading through the actual comments, it seems that AMD is not going to chase the very, extreme high-end that NVIDIA serves, like the 4090 level of GPUs. Honestly, I’m completely okay with that – those high-end GPUs are insanely expensive, and unlike what YouTube and tech websites might suggest, nobody buys these GPUs. Consistently, for more than a decade now, it’s the xx60-xx70 levels of cards that dominate the market, and it’s smart of AMD (and Intel) to focus on that segment if you want to sell as many GPUs as possible.

The very top of the GPU market just doesn’t make a lot price/performance sense. You pay considerably more for a 4090 compared to a 4080, but the price increase does not correspond to a similar increase in performance. It simply makes a lot more sense to save that money and spend it elsewhere, such as on a better CPU, more RAM, more storage, or a new display. I’d rather AMD not waste time and energy on making these high-end GPUs nobody buys, and instead focus on improving the GPUs people actually buy.

And of course, AMD just hasn’t been able to match NVIDIA at the top end, and that’s probably not going to change any time soon. Releasing a high-end, expensive GPU, only to be trounced by your one competitor every single time is not a good look, so why even try?

It’s been two years, but we finally have a proper new Redox release: the Redox team released version 0.9.0 today. Since we’ve been covering all the monthly progress reports from this Rust-based operating system for a long time now, we’ve already covered most of the improvements in this new release, so if you’ve been following along there shouldn’t be any major surprises in here, but let’s do a quick summary anyway just so we’re all up to speed.

I think the primary thing anyone moving from the previous release to the new one will be massive performance and stability improvements, as well as the arrival of the first few applications from System76’s new COSMIC Desktop. Redox is led by Jeremy Soller, a System76 engineer, and since COSMIC uses Rust as well, it only makes sense for the two projects to start benefiting from each other’s progress. Porting Linux and BSD programs has also become a lot easier, which is also evidenced by a whole slew of new ports from those operating systems.

Redox works in both virtual machines and on real hardware, but the former is definitely advised over the latter. In the latest monthly progress report, which was published only a few days ago, it’s mentioned that Redox performance in virtual machines has improved greatly. The team discovered that reading the system time was a huge bottleneck in the context switching code, which affects virtual machines particularly hard because it needs to be read from outside oft he VM. Redox now reads the TSC using KVM’s paravirtualized system time API to remove this bottleneck.

Running in a VM, Redox is now becoming slightly faster than Linux at certain synthetic benchmarks, for example the same-core context switch latency when using POSIX pipes (tested with mitigations=off). More exciting optimizations are coming, both to reduce context switch overhead further towards the hardware limit, and to reduce unnecessary context switches overall.

↫ Ribbon and Ron Williams

As time moves on and both Redox and COSMIC improve, my excitement for this operating system grows along with it. It seems the people working on both projects have their priorities quite straight, and while I’m obviously not going to make any idiotic grand statements about how Redox will replace anything, I wouldn’t be surprised to see it become a fairly solid option for those of us willing to deal with the issues that come with running something that isn’t Windows, Linux/BSD, or macOS.