6 ms·

Is ARM's power advantage really that significant for devices larger than the smart phone / tablet form factor? I'll bet $5 that the MacBook Air in the future (

by pkaler 16y ago

Is ARM's power advantage really that significant for devices larger than the smart phone / tablet form factor? I'll bet $5 that the MacBook Air in the future (18-24 months) will switch to ARM once the >2GHz ARM processors start shipping en masse. The Asus Eee PCs running Android with Snapdragon processors already embed the Cortex-A9 MPCores.

jbarham 16y ago
"4GB RAM ought to be enough for anybody." ARMS's Achilles' heel is that it's only 32-bit, and I don't think anyone wants to go back to a segmented address space any time soon.
- jbrennan 16y ago
  That's a great point. Are there any 64 bit ARM chips on the horizon? I don't know much about chips, so maybe it's not even possible given the architecture.
  - 1amzave 16y ago
    I don't recall hearing any announced, though I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were currently in the works. The A15 mentioned in the article, however, I believe has something in the spirit of x86's PAE that offers an expanded (36 bits or so?) physical address space, for better or for worse (better in that you can address more memory, worse in that it's kind of an ugly hack and not a great long-term solution).
  - ryanpetrich 16y ago
    It's possible, but just like the x86-64 transition it won't be pretty.
    - protomyth 16y ago
      It might go better for ARM given that most of the more tightly controlled software that is delivered on ARMs (app store or custom embedded).
    - mfukar 16y ago
      I'm curious; have you faced any problems in that transition? (seriously, I'm not trying to troll. I've had exactly one - making sure a project of mine would compile as PIC and that was pretty minor after the required reading)
      - ryanpetrich 16y ago
        There haven't been any major issues, it's just been glacially slow. Most software running on capable CPUs is still 32 bit, Visual Studio still doesn't have first class support for 64 bit and my MacBook still runs a 32 bit kernel. I expect ARM's transition to be quite different though--with the highest ends of their business moving in only a couple product cycles, and the lower ends of their business sticking with 32 bit indefinitely.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    There were a lot of stories in the 2000 time frame, but nothing seems to have been actually done.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- theclay 16y ago
  One of the article's contentions is that the vast majority of users are satisfied with Windows and Microsoft programs as they are right now. Most of those programs are 32-bit. By extension, if they are satisfied with 32-bit programs and don't feel a need to switch, then they won't miss 64-bit architectures.
  - sid0 16y ago
    Most Windows sold today is 64-bit, and it allows you to run more 32-bit programs without running out of memory.
    - theclay 16y ago
      Most people could care less about more applications... Virtually all of the computer users that I know limit their use to an office application and a web browser on top of Windows. That's it. The web browser gives them everything they really need. I wonder how many computer owners could even tell you if they have 32-bit or 64-bit or how the two differ. Probably the same percentage that can tell you detailed specs about their car engines. Virtually none. The only computer specs that matter anymore --exempting programmers-- are weight and battery life. A few hardcore gamers still care, but they're in the minority, even for video gamers. XBox anyone?
tptacek 16y ago
You think Apple is going to switch to an architecture that breaks VMWare?
- dreaming 16y ago
  Apple have demonstrated time and again that they are happy to break existing functionality if it suits their aims.
  - theclay 16y ago
    And just as important--Apple's customers have demonstrated time and again that they will follow wherever Apple leads.
  - tptacek 16y ago
    What's your best 2 examples?
    - Yaa101 16y ago
      OSX and Intel processors...
      - tptacek 16y ago
        OS X supported OS9 apps until long after people were puking at the mere sight of OS9 apps. And when they converted to Intel, they also provided Rosetta, a completely ridiculous binary translation system to make PPC apps work. Those are bad examples.
      - rimantas 16y ago
        The most striking for me when Jobs announced move to Intel was the bit where he told that they had OS X builds for Intel since the very first version of OS X. Who knows what are they cooking in their secret kitchens.
        prodigal_erik 16y ago
gwern 16y ago
Prediction recorded: http://predictionbook.com/predictions/1861 http://predictionbook.com/predictions/1861 Hope you're still around in 2 years; it can be interesting to ponder a falsified prediction and wonder, why did I believe that?

by pkaler 16y ago

jbarham 16y ago

"4GB RAM ought to be enough for anybody." ARMS's Achilles' heel is that it's only 32-bit, and I don't think anyone wants to go back to a segmented address space any time soon.

jbrennan 16y ago
That's a great point. Are there any 64 bit ARM chips on the horizon? I don't know much about chips, so maybe it's not even possible given the architecture.
- 1amzave 16y ago
  I don't recall hearing any announced, though I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were currently in the works. The A15 mentioned in the article, however, I believe has something in the spirit of x86's PAE that offers an expanded (36 bits or so?) physical address space, for better or for worse (better in that you can address more memory, worse in that it's kind of an ugly hack and not a great long-term solution).
- ryanpetrich 16y ago
  It's possible, but just like the x86-64 transition it won't be pretty.
  - protomyth 16y ago
    It might go better for ARM given that most of the more tightly controlled software that is delivered on ARMs (app store or custom embedded).
  - mfukar 16y ago
    I'm curious; have you faced any problems in that transition? (seriously, I'm not trying to troll. I've had exactly one - making sure a project of mine would compile as PIC and that was pretty minor after the required reading)
    - ryanpetrich 16y ago
      There haven't been any major issues, it's just been glacially slow. Most software running on capable CPUs is still 32 bit, Visual Studio still doesn't have first class support for 64 bit and my MacBook still runs a 32 bit kernel. I expect ARM's transition to be quite different though--with the highest ends of their business moving in only a couple product cycles, and the lower ends of their business sticking with 32 bit indefinitely.
- protomyth 16y ago
  There were a lot of stories in the 2000 time frame, but nothing seems to have been actually done.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
theclay 16y ago
One of the article's contentions is that the vast majority of users are satisfied with Windows and Microsoft programs as they are right now. Most of those programs are 32-bit. By extension, if they are satisfied with 32-bit programs and don't feel a need to switch, then they won't miss 64-bit architectures.
- sid0 16y ago
  Most Windows sold today is 64-bit, and it allows you to run more 32-bit programs without running out of memory.
  - theclay 16y ago
    Most people could care less about more applications... Virtually all of the computer users that I know limit their use to an office application and a web browser on top of Windows. That's it. The web browser gives them everything they really need. I wonder how many computer owners could even tell you if they have 32-bit or 64-bit or how the two differ. Probably the same percentage that can tell you detailed specs about their car engines. Virtually none. The only computer specs that matter anymore --exempting programmers-- are weight and battery life. A few hardcore gamers still care, but they're in the minority, even for video gamers. XBox anyone?

tptacek 16y ago

You think Apple is going to switch to an architecture that breaks VMWare?

dreaming 16y ago
Apple have demonstrated time and again that they are happy to break existing functionality if it suits their aims.
- theclay 16y ago
  And just as important--Apple's customers have demonstrated time and again that they will follow wherever Apple leads.
- tptacek 16y ago
  What's your best 2 examples?
  - Yaa101 16y ago
    OSX and Intel processors...
    - tptacek 16y ago
      OS X supported OS9 apps until long after people were puking at the mere sight of OS9 apps. And when they converted to Intel, they also provided Rosetta, a completely ridiculous binary translation system to make PPC apps work. Those are bad examples.
    - rimantas 16y ago
      The most striking for me when Jobs announced move to Intel was the bit where he told that they had OS X builds for Intel since the very first version of OS X. Who knows what are they cooking in their secret kitchens.
      - prodigal_erik 16y ago

gwern 16y ago

Prediction recorded: http://predictionbook.com/predictions/1861 http://predictionbook.com/predictions/1861 Hope you're still around in 2 years; it can be interesting to ponder a falsified prediction and wonder, why did I believe that?