Re: Advice on system purchase
On 10/29/2012 9:17 PM, Celejar wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:06:36 -0500
> Stan Hoeppner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 10/29/2012 6:08 PM, Celejar wrote:
>>> Interesting. Google shows that there was a thread on /. a year ago
>>> about the question of ARM on the desktop, but a quick skim shows no
>>> obviously compelling reason why it won't ever happen. Thoughts?
>> There a dozens of reasons. First and foremost, ARM sells millions of
> Thanks much for the detailed explanation. [I assume you really mean
No, I mean millions. One billion chips per year would equal 1 for every
7 humans on the planet, and that's simply impossible. Over 3 billion
people have never used an electronic device. That's almost half the
Earth's population. Do the math.
> I don't fully understand / agree with everything you
> write, but very interesting nevertheless. [I'm not conversant enough in
> these issues to challenge you on anything you write.]
It's simple economics: If one could make a decent amount of profit
pushing an ARM based desktop CPU into the market, they'd do it. They
haven't done it, nor will do it, because there's no money to be made,
only losses, as history has shown us. Both IBM/Motorola and DEC lost
money and failed to drive adoption of their RISC chips in desktops.
Apple dropped PPC for Intel, eliminating the last RISC CPU in desktop
machines. Given this history, if you're an exec at ARM, would you
consider such a push viable? Let alone profitable? No, you wouldn't.