Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by julieb, 9 Sep 2010.
I'm glad to see ARM taking this step forward. This can only lead to good things - namely, more competition and more processing cores per rack (important, when you're Facebook et al).
64-bit will come in time. This sounds like it'll be a great first-generation product.
I think they'll fail simply because it's not 64-bit. If they're aiming for the big guns, then 64-bit is a must. Larger companies will see this and not buy it because of it (I know our company won't recommend it to people we consult for), and then ARM will not make a 64-bit because their first didn't sell well.
I hope I'm wrong, I truly do, but I feel I might be on the right track.
I dunno - I mean, I can see the argument, but the people buying an ARM-based server have already made a concious effort to move away from x86. A move from 64-bit x86 to 32-bit ARM with LPAE is not likely to be much more complicated than a move from 64-bit x86 to 64-bit ARM (if such a thing existed.)
I dont see why you would need 64bit on servers apart from Memory requirement. In terms of TCO, i actually think ARM is well fitted for Server Operation.
Separate names with a comma.