×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

90 comments

Well done (5, Insightful)

Lefty2446 (232351) | about 2 years ago | (#40574107)

It's awesome that a major chip manufacturer is willing to invest time to implement a new architecture in the Linux kernel.

Pity that windows isn't open sourced, they wont benefit from this effort ;-)

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40574135)

Another pity is that (almost) no commercially available devices that will implement this chip will actually run a free OS....

Re:Well done (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574209)

This may help though. This means that much less time and investment is needed to get your new device up and running, providing a convincing a convincing case for switching to free software. Had Linux been ported later, this advantage would have been lost.

Re:Well done (2)

Kalriath (849904) | about 2 years ago | (#40574263)

He means that all the ARM hardware will be shipped with Windows 8 and SecureBoot enabled and locked to only run Windows 8 (actually, this isn't strictly true - Microsoft only dictates that SecureBoot be on and locked enabled on ARM, but if you could convince an ARM manufacturer to ship with a Linux SecureBoot signature, then you could still run Linux on it).

Re:Well done (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 2 years ago | (#40574993)

Actually the ironic part is most will run Linux...and be just as locked down as WinARM. It seems more and more of the manufacturers have figured out its easier to make them replace the unit if they don't allow upgrades and since Android is strictly GPL V2 there is nothing to stop them from doing so.

You just have to be amazed at the sheer irony when some many get their panties in a twist over a version of Windows that most likelye won't ever sell above single digits and will end up being dumped on woot! like the touchpads when it is Android that ends up with MUCH more devices you can't get upgrades for that end up in the dumpster. Hell has anybody taken a count of how many Android devices there are out there without any way to upgrade to the latest version? i know in my own family we've gone through 3 Android phones so far that couldn't be updated and we aren't even a smartphone heavy family, if we went through 3 in 2 years i can imagine how many more are sitting in sock drawers right now because they can't run the new version.

Re:Well done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575593)

FYI: Stop buying some cheap Chinese shit. Buy Google reference devices, so you can upgrade them later.

And btw Android is under Apache license, for the most part.

Re:Well done (1)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 2 years ago | (#40577865)

Google reference devices ARE cheap Chinese shit. Just because they make the die-cast case in the USA and also screw the device together here, does not mean it is made in the USA. Most of the thing is made by Foxconn.

Re:Well done (1)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#40575713)

in my own family we've gone through 3 Android phones so far that couldn't be updated and we aren't even a smartphone heavy family, if we went through 3 in 2 years i can imagine how many more are sitting in sock drawers right now because they can't run the new version.

That's why for the premium Android experience I always suggest people buy the Nexus device. I have a Nexus S and a Galaxy Nexus and both have the latest Android and have been guaranteed to get the jelly bean treatment. As far as I know the Galaxy Nexus is available for all major US carriers as well.

Re:Well done (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | about 2 years ago | (#40577149)

That's why for the premium Android experience I always suggest people buy the Nexus device. I have a Nexus S and a Galaxy Nexus and both have the latest Android and have been guaranteed to get the jelly bean treatment. As far as I know the Galaxy Nexus is available for all major US carriers as well.

The verizion Galaxy S is locked down

http://www.xda-developers.com/android/no-root-for-verizon-galaxy-s-iii-petition-started/ [xda-developers.com]

Re:Well done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40581773)

The Samsung Galaxy S and the Samsung Nexus S are different devices.

The Nexus S is a Google branded device and it is not locked down.

Re:Well done (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40576037)

But that's only true about ARM tablets from Microsoft. The rest of them - from Samsung, Google Nexus, Mot Xoom, HTC, et al - are all shipping w/ Android, and are not gonna go Windows RT. And w/ Microsoft planning to price them @ par w/ the iPhones and iPads, one can be sure that they won't be selling much either - in the end, they may just have to do what HP did w/ TouchPads.

Re:Well done (2)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | about 2 years ago | (#40574213)

ah yeah they will just not for consumers it will be used in linux servers

Re:Well done (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40574593)

HP could go a couple ways yet. They've got a 'softy leading them right now.

But this is interesting tech. [hp.com]

HP - Big Talk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574905)

,,no substance. Expect more Intel-stuff from them. They always bend over to server M$ and Intel. And whOracle. I forgot SAP.

One HP Guy Once Told Me Something (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574961)

HP does not use AMD processors (at least in serious numbers), because that would threaten their cozy relationship with Intel. If they were "unfaithful", they would not get engineering samples of new CPUs early. That HP guy was even happy about that and pointed out that "IBM is always late to have new Intel processors as they use AMD CPUs".
That is the HP mindset - bend over to get a good assfuck and even be Very Happy to have Intel's dick in their digestive system. Will they ever seriously push ARM-based servers ? When hell freezes over and Intel goes bankrupt, then they will do that.

Re:One HP Guy Once Told Me Something (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40576055)

Also worth noting is that thanks to their relationship, HP has managed to keep Intel from officially abandoning the Itanium, and instead going for Itanium3. If they were to damage their relations w/ Intel, Intel would just drop that CPU, and the high end CPU market would essentially be a 2 or 3 horse race, b/w Oracle, IBM and whoever chooses to use MIPS V.

I bet Gumstix will support 64-Bit ARM (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574275)

I have a Gumstix Overo Fire COM - "Computer On Module". It really is about a size of a stick of chewing gum, however the I/O board it mounts on is much bigger. I'm heavily into woodworking, so I'm planning to make a real nice hardwood case for my Gumstix Android Tablet.

Gumstix sells individual units to hobbyists, but most of us have commercial products in mind, at which point Gumstix offers volume discounts.

The schematics of the I/O boards are Open Source.

Michael David Crawford [dulcineatech.com], who can't be bothered to recover his password.

Re:I bet Gumstix will support 64-Bit ARM (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40574321)

Great links. Thanks for tipping a nerd into the right direction. Unfortunately you make exactly my point. To go from a gumstix module to a tablet or wearable device is a long, long way. Long enough for me too to start pondering if it is worth it to dump my next year's free time onto creating one single device (not even pondering the costs).

Re:I bet Gumstix will support 64-Bit ARM (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40576651)

The Kindle 1 team started development using gumstix boards. Once they got the software to a certain point, they were able to make better decisions on what hardware to use in the released product and had a custom board built. (not based on gumstix at all)

Re:Well done (4, Informative)

jd (1658) | about 2 years ago | (#40574317)

Don't be so sure - first to market is a major factor in business and if Linux is likely to beat all other rival OS' by a large enough margin in time, commercial vendors will look at that very seriously. More than a few would likely "gamble" (*cough*) on a free OS and gain marketshare when the profits are high than risk coming in very late when there's much less money floating around, a much higher entry fee and customers unhappy with them being late to the party.

It is, of course, essential that the chip works (remember Transmeta?), but hardware sells when there's software and if there's Linux support then there's software - and a lot of it. Assuming nobody has messed up, the chip is going to get deployed. The question is only one of where. Phones, yes, but not necessarily immediately as a lot of apps are compiled natively (not to an intermediate form) and the market is crowded with patent trolls right now.

Re:Well done (2)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40574351)

Well, sort of.

All mobile devices I have seen with a modifiable bootloader weren't what you would call top of the line products.
And there exactly lies my rant in. All mobile devices worth working on (except the now abandoned n900 and n9)
are locked down into some sort of proprietary eco system, yes that's right I'm calling Google a proprietary eco
system.

It's plainly disappointing.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575307)

Agreed, I have been installing a new OS on my N900 this week(Nitdroid, android 2.3 distro for nokia) and ever since that I decided that I refuse to buy a phone with a locked bootloader. its one of the most stupended things ever.

Could be me but I prefer Maemo over IOS, win7 and Android as a OS. I have acces to phones that run all of that, and if I compare the amount of actions I need to take for tasks then Maemo usually wins it hands down.

Anybody knows which smartphones have unlocked bootloaders nowadays that are not aboned yet?

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574407)

Of course except for all the Android Tablets...

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40574477)

No. That is completely wrong.
No android device to date has had a completely end user programmable boot loader.

Re:Well done (2)

peppepz (1311345) | about 2 years ago | (#40574529)

HTC did let me unlock the bootloader of my android device. It's not an end-user-friendly procedure though.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40576345)

There is Android devices that use uboot (Allwinner A10 uses it by default).

You can chainload uboot on stuff like the pandaboard which is a fairly common thing to do. (And there is nothing to stop you replacing the standard bootloader with it if you are capable).

You are completely wrong.

Citation Required (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574877)

Nearly all Android devices are ARM devices and run Linux. So your argument has little substance.

Re:Citation Required (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#40576167)

I've seen a whole bunch of them use MIPS based CPUs, such as Ingenics XBurst. While the MIPS percentage is small, that CPU has a much better & deeper market segmentation than ARM, and has offerings @ all sorts of price points, power consumption and performance points as well. I see MIPS, rather than x86, being the challenger to ARM on tablets and phones.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574947)

No android phones or tablets will... Yeah you are right. Only billions of devices.

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40574967)

It is funny to be seeing dozens of ACs respond to my comments today but almost no actual humans.

And it isn't even as if the protrayed responses are offensive to the comunity, excep for being misleading of course.

Re:Well done (1)

oakgrove (845019) | about 2 years ago | (#40575759)

Is there something particularly non free about Android that is sticking in your craw? My Android devices run android that was compiled from source from AOSP and they all have unlocked boot loaders. The only closed drivers are for the GPU and cameras but guess what, you can forget about open drivers for any ARM GPU that I know of even the raspberry pi is closed. So what's your beef with Android?

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40576603)

I just can't get over the fact that even though Android "flourishes" as a FOSS project nothing is actually brought back to the rest of the FOSS community. More so FOSS has started to be drained of resources by more and more people jumping on the Android bandwagon. In stead of adding to the wider community Android is fastly moving to make it a mono culture.

At least meego, maemo and mer were giving back to or improving their respecitve projects.

Re:Well done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40576683)

Well, for what it's worth, the changes the Android project made to the Linux kernel are being merged with mainline so in the future desktop Linux distros should be able to relatively easily support Android applications. That's a whole lot of something for an operating system that in the past has had trouble attracting large amounts of developers outside of the traditional community.

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40576945)

IIRC the kernel alone won't help you much with that. You would still have to run a big part of android itself. Also, I think most applications that are not device dependent (not location aware apps, not radios etc.) always had better counterparts in Desktop Linux land anyway. The last bit obviously is debatable.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40577347)

There is no 100% complete open GPU drivers at all. (The newer radeon ones are incomplete (Don't support all the features or all the opengl levels and perform worse than the ati proprietary ones (That are still pretty poor).

The r200 ones are total garbage. (Whereas XiG's are still pretty usable).

The intel ones have parts that are not free (Or else you don't have the feature implimented.)
And XiG's experimental intel driver was better for quite a bit. (For what it supports).

Allwinner seems to be supporting some type of open Mali driver but it is unlikely to be as good. (It has a better chance than others though due to the fact that some people will have access to the chip design stuff as licensed from ARM. (It might be looked at off the book).

There is nothing where the support is fully complete and everything is opensource and it performs better than Windows. (Or the XiG drivers for older hardware). I also don't know whether there ever will be.

Android is junk but so is Gnome 3 and Unity (And to a point KDE4 as well). The Nvidia drivers don't even integrate properly with Xorg or work optimally. Intel is probably the best it gets but it cannot even run supermeatboy or have fully open non obfuscated video support.

There is nothing good enough for my usage and I am not sure there ever will be. I have fairly minimal needs as well (Usable API's i.e oss over alsa / A GUI that performs as well as Mac OS X or Windows / a POSIX environment as good as AST (Complete and no cruft) / No layer upon layer of crappy abstraction just fix the initial API instead / the old UNIX principles kept to (i.e use text etc) / focus follows mouse (sloppy)).

OSS stuff seems to be focusing on being a poor quality clone of Mac OS X and Windows instead of a really good UNIX clone which is not what I want. (Especially as using UWIN and ssh'ing to localhost on Windows it is more like UNIX than the Linux commandline envirornment

Re:Well done (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#40580415)

Another pity is that (almost) no commercially available devices that will implement this chip will actually run a free OS....

Huh? What are you smoking? This thing will probably run nothing but Linux.

Re:Well done (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#40591975)

Another pity is that (almost) no commercially available devices that will implement this chip will actually run a free OS....

I'm certain there will be lots - 64-bit isn't currently too important for the consumer space (really, you need 4GB of RAM in your phone?).

No, the real benefit will come from the high end stuff - servers mostly. And you can bet that servers run Linux. Now there's a lightweight lower-power machine that can probably do 90% of the server tasks Sure it won't run a DBMS in most cases, but there's probably more than enough power to run a whole cluster of webservers (since you can probably fit a ton in a 1U chassis).

Hell, Microsoft might be forced to make an ARM version of Windows Server just to compete.

Re:Well done (1)

justforgetme (1814588) | about 2 years ago | (#40592057)

Well, tbh when I first composed that comment I was actually only thinking of mobile devices.

Truth is arm servers could do great as caches or file servers.

Re:Well done (2)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | about 2 years ago | (#40574145)

Of course MS will benefit. Their ARM Surface computers will fail due to lack of win32 x86 compatibility.

2015 will be the year of Office on 64bit Android.

Re:Well done (0, Troll)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#40574173)

Pity that windows isn't open sourced, they wont benefit from this effort ;-)

Ahahahahaahahaha, you honestly think ARM didn't already code windows support and give the code to MS?
AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAH!

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574385)

Ahahahahaahahaha, you honestly think ARM didn't already code windows support and give the code to MS?
AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAH!

Do you really think Microsoft provides their kernel source to ARM? Do you REALLY think ARM would code hardware support in windows for free? It is not ARM's job to add arch support to Windows AND Microsoft has an entire team for that. What ARM actually gives to Microsoft under NDA are the hardware datasheets.
In addition to your ignorance, that "AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAH" just makes you look stupid.

In another note, having companies adding hardware support to Linux is not something to be amazed by. Intel and a bunch others have been doing this since forever.

Re:Well done (3, Insightful)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#40574475)

Do you really think Microsoft provides their kernel source to ARM? Do you REALLY think ARM would code hardware support in windows for free?

Yes, and yes. It's in both their interests to do so, Microsoft's, because it gets them kernel support for a new arch written for free, ARM's because it sells chips (and by extension, chip designs).

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574601)

Do you really think Microsoft provides their kernel source to ARM? Do you REALLY think ARM would code hardware support in windows for free?

Yes, and yes. It's in both their interests to do so, Microsoft's, because it gets them kernel support for a new arch written for free, ARM's because it sells chips (and by extension, chip designs).

Then are delusional. You must be ignoring the advice of your psychologue and taking an higher dosage of your pills than what you should.

Re:Well done (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40579085)

you're foreign, aren't you? "psychologue" either means you're using the french word for psychologist in a paragraph of english, or more likely that you're some russian/romanian/other-idiot-country idiot you doesn't know the word, isn't willing to learn it, and just assumes it's the same in the other language. here's a hint - it's not - most words aren't. now, I'm not a grammar nazi - in fact I think if someone gets the point across it don't matta if das mis sums of da woids. I am however a douchebag nazi.

you have an opinion. the other guy has an opinion. neither of you have a clue. you just made fun of the guy saying he's tripping out on some meds after he simply answered your questions. the "hahaha" in his original comment only makes him look stupid if someone is going to interpret it that way. he's not making fun of the guy he's responding to. only you are. he is making a light comment, with a funny childlike laugh. it shows opinion. seems he's fine and you're perhaps the one, as you put it, ignoring Your "psychologue" (damn you're a retard) meds. you should go back to russia or wherever you stupid ass is from and stay there. seriously consider it. be in your own element, in your own culture. don't live in a country foreign to you and build a microcosm of shit filled with your fellow emigrated countrymen in a land where no one wants you. you know all those people in the crowd around you? they're laughing at you for being foreign and different. little things you do, like "psychologue," make you stand out, and we're all laughing at the goofy foreigner who's too dumb to get the jokes. no, not "unable to solve math equation" dumb. dumb foreigner dumb.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575621)

ARM's because it sells chips

ARM does not sell chips at all

Re:Well done (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574897)

You cannot be further from the thruth.
First time I've seen Windows ported to ARM was almost 8 years ago, with a short demonstration by a Microsoft engineer.
They had done all the porting effort themselves (IIRC it was written Longhorn build x on bottom of the screen).
Only thing I learned during this session was issues due to lack of LDREX64 support in ARM ISA for semaphores (which was added right after), and issues he faced with page tables synchronisation (ie. Data cache vs MMU).

Been here, seen that.

Re:Well done (4, Informative)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | about 2 years ago | (#40574409)

ARM holdings isn't a manufacturer, they're a design company that license the architecture to many manufacturers.

Re:Well done (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 2 years ago | (#40575181)

That makes it even more awesome. AMD actually makes their own shit and yet they never bothered to contribute proper power saving for (among others) Athlon 64 L110 for Linux. They haven't given out proper support for R690M chipset or the graphics in it which are referred to as X1250. That ARM holdings is willing to do what AMD apparently can not or will not do makes me appreciate them all the more simply for recognizing what can and should be done.

Re:Well done (2)

Idbar (1034346) | about 2 years ago | (#40575691)

No, it doesn't make it more awesome. It's necessary for them given they license their product. No manufacturer will buy stuff that it's not properly supported, and more when they still have to put additional hardware in the chip and integrate they whole system. This is just properly putting your tools in place for real manufacturers to start developing.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40576819)

AMD actually makes their own shit and yet they never bothered to contribute proper power saving for (among others) Athlon 64 L110 for Linux. They haven't given out proper support for R690M chipset or the graphics in it which are referred to as X1250.

Who do you think ported Linux to AMD64? Linux having full support for AMD64 as soon as hardware was available was probably a major contributing factor to both the growth of Linux and the success of the architecture.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575857)

They don't just send code to companies. ARM does the physical design for many different processes and sells the specs to the processor without giving you the layout information. You only get the Verilog if you pay a lot of money.

Re:Well done (1)

Ginger Unicorn (952287) | about 2 years ago | (#40575909)

I'm not sure I follow - do they manufacture physical objects?

Re:Well done (1)

Vanders (110092) | about 2 years ago | (#40576847)

No.

Re:Well done (1)

zippthorne (748122) | about 2 years ago | (#40578449)

If they don't manufacture physical objects, and the companies are "only buying the specs" then how do ARM processors get built?

Re:Well done (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#40580455)

If they don't manufacture physical objects, and the companies are "only buying the specs" then how do ARM processors get built?

There are two kinds of ARM licensees. One is purely a block licensee - these guys basically buy the ARM RTL ready to be synthesized and plopped on silicon (or tested on FPGAs). Most ARM licensees go this route.

The other is a microarchitecture license. There are only 3 known ones - Marvell (acquired from Intel who got it from Compaq, who got it from DEC), Qualcomm, and Apple (who actually invested in ARM very early on). These guys basically get access to the RTL and can make their own changes to it - basically to make an instruction-set compatible version of the ARM processor that doesn't have to be derived from

ARM generates the architecture and cores, and now they've basically put in place the necessary code to support their upcoming 64-bit processors.

And while no silicon current exists of the 64-bit (AArch64 - ARM Architecture 64-bit, the 32-bit one we're familiar with is now called AArch32), ARM would've tested it on FPGAs against their cores, so they'll work.

Of course, you haven't done Linux until you've tried to boot it on an FPGA system where the processor runs at 5MHz or so. Or faster if you disable items. (Linux 3.x took around 3-5 minutes to boot in a minimal configuration from "Uncompressing Linux" until it got to a shell prompt. One configuration with dual processors I've used only ran at 2.5MHz. Took 20 minutes to boot - 10 minutes from "Uncompressing Linux" to "done. Booting the kernel", and a further 10 to go from that to shell prompt.).

Re:Well done (1)

pmontra (738736) | about 2 years ago | (#40574435)

Linux could be the kernel for most of their chips because of Android, unless/until Win8 tablets and phone will really storm the market.

Re:Well done (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575693)

Chances of any MS system breaking the ULPC point are slight. It is just a different mindset when it comes to mobile devices. For MS to sell you a Windows(TM) tablet and then make you pay for the ARM versions of all of your software again (which will not likely even exist), that will tick some people off. The other aspect is that everyone wants what everyone else has. If I have IOS and I'm playing Angry Birds then Rovio will have to rewrite to make it for Android, now Microsoft could very easily commission Rovio to do so but the whole ecosystem is so huge even if MS did pay or program each app for Metro themselves they would never be able to keep pace.

On top of everything your system is locked to one OS and there is no firm answer one way or the other about "Can I upgrade Windows X to Windows X+1?", "Will my apps transfer from Windows X to X+1 without me having to re-buy?", "How long will each release be maintained?", etc, etc. These are things we pretty much are able to account for in the world of Android and IOS. We know most manufacturers use OS updates as a carrot and stick tactic, some manufacturers allow you to transcend this obstacle easily others not so much.

The new MS hardware will likely be greeted by a massive AD campaign and initially more than expected will go out and grab a MS device but it will be the experience these people have over the first couple months that will define where MS ends up with this project.

Re:Well done (2)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | about 2 years ago | (#40574625)

Pity that windows isn't open sourced, they wont benefit from this effort ;-)

I assume porting to the NT kernel would require virtually re-writing them from the ground up to fit NT's structure, so not much lost there.

Re:Well done (1)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | about 2 years ago | (#40667351)

At one point the NT kernel was on i386, Alpha, and PowerPC. Later ports had AMD64 and Itanium support. With Windows CE/Windows Phone, and the Zune OS, MS has a lot of experience with multiple chipsets. I don't think they would have as much of a problem as you think.

Re:Well done (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 2 years ago | (#40574739)

The kernel bits this needs were designed by the Linux kernel geeks who drew the silicon. That's what vertical integration is. The software was ready before the silicon blank was wet.

Re:Well done (1)

lennier1 (264730) | about 2 years ago | (#40574941)

They basically realized that the possible revenue warrants the investment.
Good business sense, a rare sight these days.

Awesome... 23k lines gives support to a new arch (3, Interesting)

IYagami (136831) | about 2 years ago | (#40575521)

I think that what is really awesome is that adding just 23k lines of code gives you support for a new CPU architecture!

Bandwidth? (1)

aaronb1138 (2035478) | about 2 years ago | (#40574311)

But will they encourage the implementers (chip makers) to create chips with architecture to truly support 64-bit computing. At the moment, most ARM architectures might as well be 16-bit when it comes to bus bandwidth and data transfer. No use having high speed RAM of 512-2048 MB when the interface to the storage (typically flash) can't even touch SATA 1.0 speeds.

Seriously, ARM would do more good for itself pushing vendors to adopt proper multi-channel PCIe (>x4) in their architectures to multiple devices.

Re:Bandwidth? (5, Informative)

romiz (757548) | about 2 years ago | (#40574421)

Do you realize that the chip on the other end of a SATA link - typically the controller in the SSD you're using right now - has a lot of chances to be an ARM chip ? It is the case for common SSD disk controllers (Marvell or Sandforce).

And even if it is not common in today's products, there are a lot of recent high-level ARM SoCs that offer SATA - not least because its low pin count makes it easier to route on the board in the end than a parallel bus. For example, TI's OMAP5, Freescale i.MX53 or CSR's Prima 2 have SATA support.

Re:Bandwidth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40574857)

Not to mention the others that have SATA such as Allwinner A10 and Marvell Kirkwood

Re:Bandwidth? (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#40574431)

well, there's plenty of use to having lots of memory, especially because the storage is slow.

if you'd like to start using them for clustered db's etc, then the memory is very useful.

afaik it's 48bit memory addressing though what it supports.

Re:Bandwidth? (1)

expatriot (903070) | about 2 years ago | (#40575823)

Even for 32-bit instructions, the bus to physical memory can be 32, 64, or 128 bits wide. The reason is that on-chip clocks to cache can be 10 times or more higher than external memory. PCI is not the only or fastest bus system.

Also the ARM-based server chips do have PCI and SATA.

Get ready for the next wave of marketing... (2)

peppepz (1311345) | about 2 years ago | (#40574595)

In 2012, the must-have feature for smartphones is an amount of CPU cores twice as big as the one of the previous generation.
In 2013, the new cool thing to have will be a 64-bit processor! Like in the good old times of the console wars.

Seriously though, in the near future the amount of available address space to be shared between userspace, kernel, GPU etc. might start to become too tight in 32 bits even for smartphones, at least the biggest ones.

Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (1)

excelsior_gr (969383) | about 2 years ago | (#40575193)

The company that I work for (non-IT) just decided to upgrade from WinXP to Win7, but they are still sticking with 32bit! What an insane decision. This means the lease of more than 10.000 brand new computers that will stubbornly cling to the past by refusing to make the step to 64bit. I had to raise my voice significantly, explicitly stating that I will not be able to do my work unless I get a 64bit machine with a 64bit OS (which is true). I finally got it, but I guess the folk down at the IT department all know my name and hate me for not sticking with the rules.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575301)

Don't worry.You're pretty much the only one with that fate. I don't remember the last time I saw a 32 bit system that was not a mobile/handheld one.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575733)

It turns out that a 32 bit windows patched to enable PAE runs better than a 64 bit windows on the same hardware. I have tested it both ways.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40583053)

You're apparently a moron, because it has no effect unless that 32-bit version's name has "Server" in it.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40575607)

Ha, it's the same at the University Library I work at (where we also support all the branch campuses and that's a TON of machines!). Even though all the new(er) machines are 64-bit Core i5 or i7's, and even most of the older ones has 64-bit support, we only use 32 bit Windows 7 images we push out either via Symantec Ghost or IBM (BigFix) System Manager... I have no clue why they're sticking to 32 bit when the machines have a good amount of RAM (Most have 4GB which isn't being fully utilized!)

The other thing I find odd is the "visitor stations" image is some verison of Windows 7 that is only validated for 180-days, then we have to call in and get a new key and re-activate for another 180 days.. these machines are locked down tight with basically just a browser, Word, Excel, and I *think* that's it.. maybe powerpoint. A co-worker asked about a office suite to stick in the image, and I said about OpenOffice or Libre Office since they'll do the job just fine, and asked why they don't use Linux since most distributions can be setup to work on a ActiveDirectory setup and the machine. I guess that's up to the library dean and not the IT division.. hopefully sometime I'll be in a position I could recommend Linux so we don't have the stupid 180 day crap which currently means going to each machine, logging in, clicking the activate box, and then calling Microsoft to get a new "key".

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (0)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#40575711)

I finally got it, but I guess the folk down at the IT department all know my name and hate me for not sticking with the rules.

As the should dislike all trouble makers.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#40576637)

Aside from the memory thing, which you dont need to run IE, and Office, I have yet to see a significant reason to run 64 bit windows clients, and it usually saves a little bit of money as well. So unless you want to pay for it (and how did you do your work on a 32 bit win xp machine but now need a 64 bit os?)

Now linux 64 bit is about as useful as windows XP 64, you want a throwback, hardly anything works out of the box and you spend your time hand compiling what seems like every piddleshit thing. Now granted its been about a year since I tried it, but lets face it, linux people drag their feet kicking and screaming over improving something, when they could be doing something fun ... like redesigning the desktop theme every minor release

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40577729)

There are people doing large data analysis jobs, EDA work and so on on their PCs. They do indeed need more than 4 GB.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (1)

xaxa (988988) | about 2 years ago | (#40579015)

That's the complete opposite of my experience with 64-bit Linux -- everything has worked as well (or not) as it did on 32-bit Linux. Why shouldn't it? Obviously the code needs to be recompiled, but generally someone else does that, or else I'd need to do it myself on 32-bit anyway.

On Windows 64-bit we've had many problems with odd (often old-ish) drivers not being supported, and old software being buggy, even in "32 bit mode". So far, we only have about 15 machines running 64-bit Windows 7, but all the Linux servers (all 64-bit) have been running fine for many, many years.

Re:Great! Now, can we all switch to 64bit, please? (1)

excelsior_gr (969383) | about 2 years ago | (#40580983)

how did you do your work on a 32 bit win xp machine but now need a 64 bit os?

I didn't. I used a 32bit XP box for Office-work and internet browsing and I logged in to a 64bit SUSE sever via PuTTY for doing serious work. But then I bought a 6-core desktop computer with 24 GB RAM and, of course, I just couldn't let the IT people just slap their 32bit Win7 image on it. It would just beat the purpose of having such a machine.

To Eat Shit and to Die Intel DIe - Today (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40579167)

To Amd
Eat Intel Death Remains
and Die

-

Today
Submit Now

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...