5 ms·

> I think the market should be more modular so that any company can build cool stuff with top of the line CPUs, not just Apple. What exactly is stopping, say,

> I think the market should be more modular so that any company can build cool stuff with top of the line CPUs, not just Apple. What exactly is stopping, say, Qualcomm, to introduce "top of the line CPU"? Apart from engineering merit?

Leherenn 6y ago
Windows on ARM is just not particularly compelling. You have a lot more to lose compatibility wise, and likely less performance to gain given that Apple has the better chip and control over both the hardware and software.
- madeofpalk 6y ago
  Why is it not compelling? Because they just did a bad job of it?
  - notriddle 6y ago
    Why would you choose Windows over ChromiumOS?
    - garmaine 6y ago
      Because I want to do something other than run a browser.
    - valuearb 6y ago
      It’s paradoxical that so many devs bemoan apples closed system, which allows you to build literally anything you want from Unix command lines up to the best pc and mobile Uis in the world, but love developing in a UX trash heap walled in by HTML.
  - rleigh 6y ago
    One of the reasons is because they used the switch to ARM to lock the system down tightly. Mandatory secureboot that couldn't be disabled. A Windows system that's not as open to modification as the x64 version. They did their level best to get maximum control and this was and is a huge turn off. If they made it as open as x86/x64, and pulled out all the stops to get software support equivalent to x86 like Apple have done with their system, then it would be a compelling proposition. As it is, it has woeful software support, and Microsoft did very little to address this.
    - fomine3 6y ago
      Windows RT was a disaster but Win10 ARM is no longer locked.
ogre_codes 6y ago
What is stopping Qualcomm? Money. Investing in a top end CPU is expensive and currently there is no buyer for a workstation class CPU other than Apple. Microsoft's ARM efforts have been lackluster and sales has been lethargic. The last time Microsoft tried to jump to another architecture was an expensive failure. Who is going to invest hundreds of billions in jump starting this category with a track record like that? Likewise, Linux. While Linux is a great development platform, Qualcomm isn't going to gamble tens of millions on developers migrating en-mass to a Linux/ ARM platform. Someone has to put up the money and it's a bunch.
- apetrovic 6y ago
  I agree 100%, and that's the answer to OP statement - it's not enough to just wish that the market is different. Someone needs to put their money where their mouth is. Currently, the only company willing to bet enormous amount of money and frankly the entire Mac platform to change status quo is Apple. Maybe (and I really hope so) Apple will push other ARM processors on the desktop as a side-effects - while Qualcomm is more or less "just" the packer of ARM designed cores, and if I understand the market it's entirely out of their reach to design M1-class CPU, maybe Apple will push ARM to design more efficient desktop cores. Maybe Amazon or Google will do that with their custom ARM silicon now when Apple demonstrated that processors doesn't need to be hot to be powerful. For so long Intel sold us basically the same thing, and we cheered when AMD was just a couple percent faster. However this ends, I'm glad that someone at least rocks the boat.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    I suspect Qualcomm focuses far more on their modems and integrating their modems into the CPUs because that is where their IP is. Fundamentally the reason Qualcomm can charge what they charge for their CPUs revolves around bundling their modems. Nvidia is the most likely company to build a higher end ARM CPU to compete with the M1. With the ARM core and their GPU expertise, they could conceivably crank out something which performs much better than Qualcomm.

Leherenn 6y ago

Windows on ARM is just not particularly compelling. You have a lot more to lose compatibility wise, and likely less performance to gain given that Apple has the better chip and control over both the hardware and software.

madeofpalk 6y ago
Why is it not compelling? Because they just did a bad job of it?
- notriddle 6y ago
  Why would you choose Windows over ChromiumOS?
  - garmaine 6y ago
    Because I want to do something other than run a browser.
  - valuearb 6y ago
    It’s paradoxical that so many devs bemoan apples closed system, which allows you to build literally anything you want from Unix command lines up to the best pc and mobile Uis in the world, but love developing in a UX trash heap walled in by HTML.
- rleigh 6y ago
  One of the reasons is because they used the switch to ARM to lock the system down tightly. Mandatory secureboot that couldn't be disabled. A Windows system that's not as open to modification as the x64 version. They did their level best to get maximum control and this was and is a huge turn off. If they made it as open as x86/x64, and pulled out all the stops to get software support equivalent to x86 like Apple have done with their system, then it would be a compelling proposition. As it is, it has woeful software support, and Microsoft did very little to address this.
  - fomine3 6y ago
    Windows RT was a disaster but Win10 ARM is no longer locked.

ogre_codes 6y ago

What is stopping Qualcomm? Money. Investing in a top end CPU is expensive and currently there is no buyer for a workstation class CPU other than Apple. Microsoft's ARM efforts have been lackluster and sales has been lethargic. The last time Microsoft tried to jump to another architecture was an expensive failure. Who is going to invest hundreds of billions in jump starting this category with a track record like that? Likewise, Linux. While Linux is a great development platform, Qualcomm isn't going to gamble tens of millions on developers migrating en-mass to a Linux/ ARM platform. Someone has to put up the money and it's a bunch.

apetrovic 6y ago
I agree 100%, and that's the answer to OP statement - it's not enough to just wish that the market is different. Someone needs to put their money where their mouth is. Currently, the only company willing to bet enormous amount of money and frankly the entire Mac platform to change status quo is Apple. Maybe (and I really hope so) Apple will push other ARM processors on the desktop as a side-effects - while Qualcomm is more or less "just" the packer of ARM designed cores, and if I understand the market it's entirely out of their reach to design M1-class CPU, maybe Apple will push ARM to design more efficient desktop cores. Maybe Amazon or Google will do that with their custom ARM silicon now when Apple demonstrated that processors doesn't need to be hot to be powerful. For so long Intel sold us basically the same thing, and we cheered when AMD was just a couple percent faster. However this ends, I'm glad that someone at least rocks the boat.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  I suspect Qualcomm focuses far more on their modems and integrating their modems into the CPUs because that is where their IP is. Fundamentally the reason Qualcomm can charge what they charge for their CPUs revolves around bundling their modems. Nvidia is the most likely company to build a higher end ARM CPU to compete with the M1. With the ARM core and their GPU expertise, they could conceivably crank out something which performs much better than Qualcomm.