4 ms·

Hooray, we have successfully fixed the mistake with an open platform and will now be relegated to incompatible hardware without any competition. At last, the f

by tjoff 6y ago

Hooray, we have successfully fixed the mistake with an open platform and will now be relegated to incompatible hardware without any competition. At last, the future will surely be bright!

duskwuff 6y ago
How was x86 any more "open" of a platform? If anything, x86 is a far more "closed" platform, as there are only two remaining manufacturers of x86 parts, and there is no licensing process to join them. Meanwhile, there are hundreds of ARM licensees, and the process for becoming a licensee is all documented online [1]. [1]: https://www.arm.com/why-arm/how-licensing-works https://www.arm.com/why-arm/how-licensing-works
- tjoff 6y ago
  How? It is absolutely inconceivable how much more open it is. Also, the CPU is but a minor part of the puzzle. But still that is still twice as many as apple (good luck exchanging that apple-arm with any other brand). Please let me know how open you think the next apple ARM platform is when you try to boot any OS not written by apple. Please compare that with a computer built from AMD/Intel with a motherboard out of dozens of manufacturers etc. Any ATX power supply etc. Pretty much any PCI-E graphics card etc.
  - duskwuff 6y ago
    You are confusing the x86 CPU architecture (which is closed) with the PC platform (which is relatively open). > Also, the CPU is but a minor part of the puzzle. But still that is still twice as many as apple (good luck exchanging that apple-arm with any other brand). Even on x86, interchangeable CPUs are the exception, not the rule. Intel and AMD CPUs haven't even used the same socket since the 1990s, and even within those manufacturers, socket incompatibilities are common. Software interchangeability is more of an operating systems issue than an architectural one. With appropriate software shims, though, there is no reason to suspect that (for example) Linux ARM software could be run on an Apple ARM CPU. In fact, it's quite likely that tools like the Android emulator will do exactly that. > Please compare that with a computer built from AMD/Intel with a motherboard out of dozens of manufacturers etc. Any ATX power supply etc. Pretty much any PCI-E graphics card etc. Server-class ARM hardware generally does use similar parts as x86 servers, including power supplies and PCIe peripherals.
    - tjoff 6y ago
      I am not. But also, how many x86 processors are sold outside of the PC platform? They have a symbiotic relationship. The foundation of everything we have today. > Software interchangeability is more of an operating systems issue than an architectural one. Not if the architecture is designed around keeping others out. But just not telling anyone how to do it is enough in 99% of cases. Some hacker might post a buggy proof-of-concept for an obsolete device that no one will run. > Server-class ARM hardware generally does use similar parts as x86 servers, including power supplies and PCIe peripherals. Wanna place a bet on what apple is going to do?
- klelatti 6y ago
  Precisely. And the fact that you can run ARMv8 on both a Raspberry PI and the Fujitsu Fugaku which is now No. 1 on the Top 500 says something about what is possible as a result.
- josephcsible 6y ago
  It's more open in terms of what software you can run. And if you cared about hardware being open, RISC-V is where you'd have to go. ARM certainly isn't open hardware.
- imtringued 6y ago
  x86 might be a platform with few vendors. ARM isn't even a platform. Most SoCs are meant to run a single OS and that's about it. Not exactly what I'd call a platform because platforms let their users build on top of them. That includes running whatever OS you want to run on that processor. What you might be worried about is a duopoly which has nothing to do with whether something is a software platform or not. For example Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows. That doesn't stop Windows from being a platform for which you can write arbitrary software. Apple has a monopoly on iOS but it's not possible for users to write their own software, they have to join a developer program that can always exclude them. This is what one would call a closed platform. ARM is closer to the iOS model than to Windows.
pjmlp 6y ago
Actually the original mistake was IBM's to make.
- tjoff 6y ago
  Yes, that was my point, we are still "suffering" from it.

by tjoff 6y ago

Hooray, we have successfully fixed the mistake with an open platform and will now be relegated to incompatible hardware without any competition. At last, the future will surely be bright!

duskwuff 6y ago

How was x86 any more "open" of a platform? If anything, x86 is a far more "closed" platform, as there are only two remaining manufacturers of x86 parts, and there is no licensing process to join them. Meanwhile, there are hundreds of ARM licensees, and the process for becoming a licensee is all documented online [1]. [1]: https://www.arm.com/why-arm/how-licensing-works https://www.arm.com/why-arm/how-licensing-works

tjoff 6y ago
How? It is absolutely inconceivable how much more open it is. Also, the CPU is but a minor part of the puzzle. But still that is still twice as many as apple (good luck exchanging that apple-arm with any other brand). Please let me know how open you think the next apple ARM platform is when you try to boot any OS not written by apple. Please compare that with a computer built from AMD/Intel with a motherboard out of dozens of manufacturers etc. Any ATX power supply etc. Pretty much any PCI-E graphics card etc.
- duskwuff 6y ago
  You are confusing the x86 CPU architecture (which is closed) with the PC platform (which is relatively open). > Also, the CPU is but a minor part of the puzzle. But still that is still twice as many as apple (good luck exchanging that apple-arm with any other brand). Even on x86, interchangeable CPUs are the exception, not the rule. Intel and AMD CPUs haven't even used the same socket since the 1990s, and even within those manufacturers, socket incompatibilities are common. Software interchangeability is more of an operating systems issue than an architectural one. With appropriate software shims, though, there is no reason to suspect that (for example) Linux ARM software could be run on an Apple ARM CPU. In fact, it's quite likely that tools like the Android emulator will do exactly that. > Please compare that with a computer built from AMD/Intel with a motherboard out of dozens of manufacturers etc. Any ATX power supply etc. Pretty much any PCI-E graphics card etc. Server-class ARM hardware generally does use similar parts as x86 servers, including power supplies and PCIe peripherals.
  - tjoff 6y ago
    I am not. But also, how many x86 processors are sold outside of the PC platform? They have a symbiotic relationship. The foundation of everything we have today. > Software interchangeability is more of an operating systems issue than an architectural one. Not if the architecture is designed around keeping others out. But just not telling anyone how to do it is enough in 99% of cases. Some hacker might post a buggy proof-of-concept for an obsolete device that no one will run. > Server-class ARM hardware generally does use similar parts as x86 servers, including power supplies and PCIe peripherals. Wanna place a bet on what apple is going to do?
klelatti 6y ago
Precisely. And the fact that you can run ARMv8 on both a Raspberry PI and the Fujitsu Fugaku which is now No. 1 on the Top 500 says something about what is possible as a result.
josephcsible 6y ago
It's more open in terms of what software you can run. And if you cared about hardware being open, RISC-V is where you'd have to go. ARM certainly isn't open hardware.
imtringued 6y ago
x86 might be a platform with few vendors. ARM isn't even a platform. Most SoCs are meant to run a single OS and that's about it. Not exactly what I'd call a platform because platforms let their users build on top of them. That includes running whatever OS you want to run on that processor. What you might be worried about is a duopoly which has nothing to do with whether something is a software platform or not. For example Microsoft has a monopoly on Windows. That doesn't stop Windows from being a platform for which you can write arbitrary software. Apple has a monopoly on iOS but it's not possible for users to write their own software, they have to join a developer program that can always exclude them. This is what one would call a closed platform. ARM is closer to the iOS model than to Windows.

pjmlp 6y ago

Actually the original mistake was IBM's to make.

tjoff 6y ago
Yes, that was my point, we are still "suffering" from it.