Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 2 Jun 2010.
If x86 is wrong why have VIA invested lots of money designing the Nano?
Intel han't got it wrong with x86, they're just looking at more powerful devices where the battery life isn't quite as critical.
Obviously arm has a big future in mobile devices. Quite often power consumption is everything.
That's not true. Nano is aimed at a constant power supply, not battery. The problem for x86 is SOFTWARE: many companies don't know how to write software that is optimised for low power that leaves the CPU alone so it can sleep. Also, x86 = Windows = Fail and you have to commit to Intel's set design rather than pick from the many-many ARM options on the market.
ARM options? You pretty much only have ARM11, ARM Cortex A8, A9 and Snapdragon.
Intel has 1 CPU designed for mobile handheld Market at This time
And windows on any smart phone will cripple it
Snapdragon is just am implementation of one of the ARM architecture IP's, so is Apple A4.
the problem are consumers, they want backwards compatibility with their desktop Windows system while complaining about battery life. Apple's way of forcing people down the RISC ARM architecture route for iPad is a very good way to have battery life while preserving performance and portability.
solution: forget about x86, it's a very clumbersome implementation anyway. promote ARM's architecture and have Microsoft deal with instruction difference + backwards compatibility in software. by the time this has been developed, im sure Samsung and the like will be able to manufacture a fast enough chip.
Well no of course it bloody can't but the angle-occupying pachyderm is that the overwhelming majority of the world's most useful software is compiled for x86.
Separate names with a comma.