3 ms·
True, although with the Intel box you also have PSU, cooling and cabling and you find that multi-headed video cards and distribution cables to drive lots of dis
by excuse-me 14y ago
True, although with the Intel box you also have PSU, cooling and cabling and you find that multi-headed video cards and distribution cables to drive lots of display end up costing far more than putting a single board Linux box in the back of each TV.
But the real argument against a Wintel sign is to head over to thedailywtf.com any day and see pictures giant billboards showing BSOD or asking for a driver
- ajross 14y agoSeems like that second point is about the "win" part. Surely a PC board is going to have much better support running Linux than an ARM SoC. The linked article is about hardware, not windows. The first can be true or not. There are Intel PC boards available at all price ranges down to $80 or so. It's only the very bottom of the SoC range (i.e. the Raspberry Pi, a system so bleeding edge you still can't actually buy one anywhere) where you start to see price competition.
- excuse-me 14y agoYes it's only the rPI that actually delivers on the CHEAP linux SoC so far -- otherwise you can get a VIA x86 board for the same $100 as most ARM. What is interesting is that rPi finally delivers "the computers will be just bumps on cables" prediction. With HDMI out and powered by USB it becomes very nice for a distributed video screen display compared to the normal multi-headed PC solutions. It's just odd that if Intel thinks the future is competing with ARM in tablets with lower power Atom it produces something that is essentially a high end desktop replacement machine.