Re: Debian ARM success story: Debian desktop on a TS-7300
Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> James wrote:
>
>> The prices dropping out of the bottom on x86 architectures is why Intel
>> is leaving x86.
>> They cannot compete anymore in the x86 arena. That does not mean that
>> x86 is dying,
>> many other companies have x86 based technology and cores that can be put
>> on substrate
>> (FPGAs, asics, ....).
>>
>
> You're totally wrong! Intel has sold its Xscale division to Marvell in
> order to concentrate on *ultra-low-power x86 processors*...
Maybe about lintel's x86 plans but not about the price dropping on 32
bit processors. There now many
32 bit processors for a just a few bucks, in quantity. X86 has appeal
because of the greater
Linux and BSD communities, GNU and the myriad of open source projects. Maybe
Intel has come to their senses, and has decided to invest in x86, since
AMD has been
cleaning their clocks by maintaining x86 compatibility while pursing 64
bit low power
performance. Besides just because Intel (according to your info) pursues
low power x86, it does
not mean they will be prosperous in the x86-LP market. Intel has many
failures, some due
to their close political alignments. Very similar to why Bill cannot
peddle his winbloz
products in the EU, Asia and many other places. DRM, of which Intel has
played a
key role in, is a huge black eye for Intel. The rest of the world is
looking at the arrogance
of the MPEG (et. al.) consortiums and saying, why don't we just do our
on thing in multimedia,
hence, DRM is dead. Although manufacturers' will not publish details,
many products
and chipsets have the ability to work around DRM.
Low power is always important for density, cooling and mobile needs. If
Intel is dumping xscale (arm)
That does not effect ARM's overall appeal. TI now uses ARM cores with
their DSPs
in some hybrid processors. as do thousands of semiconductor companies.
When you look at the
mips versus power(consumption) arm processors are hard to complete with.
And the arms scale
down to 8 bit uPs, very cost effectively, with hard to match performance.
Beside you highlighted my main point: Diversity in processor selection
(for linux/bsd) is increasing,
not decreasing!
James
Reply to: