From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A091381F4 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:54:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE2FDE06B3; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:53:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FAFDE06B3 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id t11so1046234wey.40 for ; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 21:52:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:organization :x-mailer:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ACdmVYClExdYfn2qJoQIYeHcg316C+fPNriYswclGRk=; b=a/mEPnFPXqAxA6laftNImaFXOZqhkPNRF8EACsXkDpJWO51N9swf7YCr1WR25p6+nO kiWIMgdWvnSZt7FZYrxg2QtZ52fD912I28JmSb2IBkndlJORdL4i+6aznGW4Tu4qc30i dEKLmPeFUr2GnVxAiSfF0iQwxDdUgQhwkiTsznBGrVwxc9fTfU7IQRhYtzLtlbla2J95 FPLhV/S6FCVRot9AawR1q+VGHFEGuiHXpjvL4oXjQBZMM8Ot73n/J7pcLG5rYqrfqYEH CY7mqF1Yl+eqKLYHBg4knAVW+8gYCXLcOxr1a47YktBKyRASb0Dwfn2A7nwbnnu5/MEi PpIg== Received: by 10.180.86.36 with SMTP id m4mr8755473wiz.5.1355118762180; Sun, 09 Dec 2012 21:52:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from khamul.example.com (196-215-209-117.dynamic.isadsl.co.za. [196.215.209.117]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id y3sm8629521wix.6.2012.12.09.21.52.40 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 09 Dec 2012 21:52:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:49:23 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} Will ARM take over the world? Message-ID: <20121210074923.7e16a955@khamul.example.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20121209100322.009e6fe9@khamul.example.com> Organization: Internet Solutions X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.1 (GTK+ 2.24.13; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 33f146e5-2d12-4c4d-ab87-39ac77d3e9bc X-Archives-Hash: d3a8c8496bc1e44458c6299b111323b3 On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:44:09 -0800 Grant wrote: > > But this is an old, old, old argument. People predicted the demise > > of> mainframes for years when x86 started becoming a quite powerful > > of> cpu.> The current truth is that IBM sell more mainframes year > > of> on year, growth> is more than mere inflation can account for, > > of> and mainframes are just> getting stronger. So x86 didn't kill > > of> the mainframe, instead x86 played> a huge role in making both > > of> stronger. I see no reason to believe the> same story won't play > > of> out exactly the same all over again between x86> and ARM.This > > of> is really interesting. =A0"all over again" is exactly what I > > of> expect to happen, but I didn't realize it happened as you say. > > of> A friend of mine was really into SPARC in the 90's and > > of> complained loudly when x86 grabbed its market share. =A0At least > > of> that was how I understood it. =A0I imagine the same thing > > of> happening with ARM and x86, but maybe I'm jumping to > > of> conclusions? x86 and SPARC is not the same thing as x86 and ARM. SPARC was a RISC processor but in it's heyday was comparable to x86 in terms of computing power. It had one sponsor (Sun) and one user (Sun) and one OS (Solaris, or maybe it was called SunOS back then). x86 had far greater mindshare in general plus it had the killer "feature" - the bean counter was already using it in his desktop and knew SPARC and x86 were quite comparable in some significant ways. He also knew the price difference.... It's a classic case of a smaller player trying to take on a bigger player directly on it's own turf. x86 vs ARM is not that game at all. ARM is an embedded processor that, whilst it could replace x86 on low-end desktops, really shines in embedded. It won't displace x86 (nor is it trying to), it will carve out new niches for itself, almost exactly like x86 did when mainframes and minis ruled. Where ARM does replace x86, I reckon it will be because x86 was not really a good solution there. For example, Atom vs ARM (that is a valid comparison). I don't think Atom will last much longer - the form factor that really used it - netbooks - is much better served by tablets. The tablet trumps the netbook, and Atom dies when the netbook dies. --=20 Alan McKinnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com