Cortex A15 - 5x faster.

[Prometheus]

Also I expect Apple to move their laptops over to ARM very soon, I get the impression they never liked using x86 anyway.

I'm expecting the same. I've been wanting an ARM laptop for ages now (I don't like how hot x86 machines run, amongst other things), so I think it would be interesting to see what would happen with laptops in general if Apple were to do that.

 

[lulzfish]

I'm expecting the same. I've been wanting an ARM laptop for ages now (I don't like how hot x86 machines run, amongst other things), so I think it would be interesting to see what would happen with laptops in general if Apple were to do that.

I'm afraid that if desktops and laptops move to ARM, they will all take after iPhones, running an embedded operating system that you can't easily change. What if they don't want to boot from external media?

 

[Prometheus]

People expect different from laptops and desktops, though. Besides, I've no doubt that it would be just as easy to install, say, Debian ARM, as it is to install it on an x86 box.

 

[Exophase]

I've been saying it for a few years now, if Intel don't move to ARM they are going to become irrelevant, they have been struggling like crazy to squeeze the dead horse that is x86 for too long.


ARM is going to brutalize X86 within the next 8 years and during that time we will also see full Windows ARM released and pushed as the next big thing.


I always see X86 like an old out dated uneconomical petrol engine still being shoehorned in to nice looking cars with more and more elaborate modifications to get a few more BHP from it each time. You know it has to stop somewhere.


Also I expect Apple to move their laptops over to ARM very soon, I get the impression they never liked using x86 anyway.

I don't see it happening like this. I don't think Cortex-A15 will have single-core performance at all comparable with current high-end x86 (much less what's out in three years). That has to change before it can have any real shot at becoming viable in the desktop (not nettop, per se) or laptop (not netbook, per se) markets. People expect laptops to provide the same software experience as desktops, and ARM can't deliver that, especially not if they'll be predominantly emulating x86 code. Likewise, developers won't really like having a segmented market between what the desktops and laptops run at acceptable speed. We might see an iOS netbook, but I kind of doubt that too because it doesn't really fit the imagery or contracting power that the current devices do.


ARM will continue to keep x86 out of phones and other handhelds, and might take some netbook and even nettop share, and will hopefully make some inroads on servers where aggregate CPU usage dominates power consumption. It's far from a sure thing given how little it has taken so far, despite it being speculated forever now. Even the Tegra 2 tablets are unimpressive. The power savings just aren't enough when the CPU is such a small factor of the overall system. What is much more likely to rattle Intel out of the netbook and nettop market is AMD's bobcat.

 

[craigix]

I'm expecting the same. I've been wanting an ARM laptop for ages now (I don't like how hot x86 machines run, amongst other things), so I think it would be interesting to see what would happen with laptops in general if Apple were to do that.

I think that will be what starts the greater move to ARM. Apple will start it and then everyone else will follow.


A dual core 2.5Ghz ARM chip would be all most people would need in a Laptop (I wish my laptop was that fast).


I'd expect Apple to even have a 3Ghz one in development.


Are desktops even that relevant anymore? Do people still buy them in great numbers?

 

[Prometheus]

I think that will be what starts the greater move to ARM. Apple will start it and then everyone else will follow.

Looks like we're thinking the same thing.

Are desktops even that relevant anymore? Do people still buy them in great numbers?

Last I heard, though I admit it's been a while since I last checked, laptop growth in Europe was up and desktop sales were falling. I don't know if that's changed of late. I do know that I don't remember seeing any of the chain stores advertising desktops in years, though - in fact, just today, I've seen a bunch of advertisements for laptops and netbooks, but nothing else.

 

[Exophase]

Of course desktops still sell. Even if laptops have shifted more in consumer sales desktops are still what's used in businesses. There's a desktop for almost every white collar worker.

 

[Granitehead]

Of course desktops still sell. Even if laptops have shifted more in consumer sales desktops are still what's used in businesses. There's a desktop for almost every white collar worker.

And desktops are just cheaper - if you don't need a computer to take it with you all the time (for example if you have a Pandora or that ), then why pay more?

 

[craigix]

Of course desktops still sell. Even if laptops have shifted more in consumer sales desktops are still what's used in businesses. There's a desktop for almost every white collar worker.

Yeah, maybe some antique ones running IE6.


It's pretty standard practice in the UK to issue laptops which just plug in to whatever terminal you sit down at at least at government level.


Desktops are dying. You think they are still going to be around in any significant numbers in 8 years in comparison to portable computing?

 

[Exophase]

Yeah, I have a netbook but I've never bought a standard-level laptop, ie something that's meant to be desktop comparable.

Yeah, maybe some antique ones running IE6.


It's pretty standard practice in the UK to issue laptops which just plug in to whatever terminal you sit down at at least at government level.

I have no idea how things are in the UK, but in the US (including at the government level) that isn't the case at all. It makes no sense to buy laptops for anything other than widely deployed workers - ie, not the cubicle workers that most are. A laptop is going to be more expensive and have a worse form factor for productivity, unless you buy an external monitor and keyboard for it, which is going to up the price again. I'm sure for many other countries, especially poorer ones, the shift isn't towards laptops.

Desktops are dying. You think they are still going to be around in any significant numbers in 8 years?

Yes, I do. I don't think they're dying just because you say so..

 

[j6cubic]

I'm afraid that if desktops and laptops move to ARM, they will all take after iPhones, running an embedded operating system that you can't easily change. What if they don't want to boot from external media?

No. Unlocked desktop PCs are neccessary. Look at the iPhone. Why does it have a lot of apps? Because everyone with a Mac can make one (after paying Apple some money). Could you do that with a locked-down OS? No, not really. Anything that allows you to program must allow you to execute arbitrary code. Anything that allows arbitrary code can't be locked down.


One could argue that they could release "dev kits" like console manufacturers. Except that they would either have to make those dev kits price competitive with the regular systems (which they would then simply supplant) or instantly alienate all independent software developers who would just walk over to the competition. The competitors wouldn't lock down their systems because all those small developers mean truckloads of cash.


Desktops and PDAs (and tablets are just PDAs with a large screen) are different markets and must be handled differently. Microsoft has shown what happens if you treat tablets like PCs (few people care about them). Apple is too smart to treat PCs like tablets.


Apple didn't lock down iOS because of ARM, they locked it down because the form factor it's used for is not conductive to software development anyway, thus they can get away with a locked-down system.

 

[lulzfish]

Yeah, maybe some antique ones running IE6.

This is funny, actually.


My school used to have some Dell desktops that were maybe 4 years old, all running Windows XP.


This year, one of the labs was upgraded so we could have a video game class.


Now the lab has something like 20 brand-new Dells, I think XPSs, with Radeon 5xxx-something graphics cards (they can play Unreal Tournament 3 decently) and Core i7s. I think they have something like 3 GB of RAM, as well.


They put the same Windows XP image on them. I believe it still has IE 6, though they upgraded to Firefox 3 finally.


Also, I bought a cheap Acer to use as a home server. My laptop is a desktop replacement though, so I don't expect to buy a desktop for a while. I want a Pandora eventually, then when my laptop dies, I can probably get a desktop to replace it, and the Pandora will be a mobile device. Once I'm out of college, I won't have to worry about packing up my computer all the time to go home or whatever.

 

[Gren]

I'm expecting the same. I've been wanting an ARM laptop for ages now (I don't like how hot x86 machines run, amongst other things), so I think it would be interesting to see what would happen with laptops in general if Apple were to do that.

My Thinkpad X200S has the Centrino 2 VPro ULV Core 2 Duo @ 1.6Ghz (2 year old tech!) and has plenty of power, runs cool and silent, and gives me 5-6 hours on the 6 cell battery. Apparently the 9 cell battery can achieve over 10 hours with appropriate battery-saving settings. The Lenovo engineering is also pretty impressive - it's certainly the best built portable I've come across with its magnesium alloy chassis.


In fact, being a sub-notebook, it replaced my laptop and netbook, and is more actually more powerful and more power friendly than either. My 901 EEE was cool and power friendly, but was hugely under-powered - I'm not sure if the latest Atoms chips are any better?!


Spose it's not exactly a cheap option though (I guess used models are now affordable). Is there a ULV version of the i3/5/7 yet?

 

[Exophase]

My Thinkpad X200S has the Centrino 2 VPro ULV Core 2 Duo @ 1.6Ghz (2 year old tech!) and has plenty of power, runs cool and silent, and gives me 5-6 hours on the 6 cell battery. Apparently the 9 cell battery can achieve over 10 hours with appropriate battery-saving settings. The Lenovo engineering is also pretty impressive - it's certainly the best built portable I've come across with its magnesium alloy chassis.


In fact, being a sub-notebook, it replaced my laptop and netbook, and is more actually more powerful and more power friendly than either. My 901 EEE was cool and power friendly, but was hugely under-powered - I'm not sure if the latest Atoms chips are any better?!


Spose it's not exactly a cheap option though (I guess used models are now affordable). Is there a ULV version of the i3/5/7 yet?

The Atoms are really not better than the Celeron 900 in the original Eee, but the big thrust of all this is that your Thinkpad really has a much bigger battery.

 

[Prometheus]

Why do they always provide such poor batteries, anyway? Whatever happened to a decent battery being included? :blink: (Note: It's a pet peeve of mine that I'm expected to pay a fortune more for a second battery if I want a practical battery life.*)


*(This does not apply to my MacBook, which came with a battery that really does last the seven hours they say it will. Although it still runs too warm for my liking.)

 

[Exophase]

Battery capacity is proportional to two things: cost and size. Netbooks are cheap and small, so they get lower capacity batteries.


I think it's good to focus on lower power consumption instead of larger capacity batteries. The latter is doing nothing to cut down on overall electricity usage, which is a real issue.

 

[Prometheus]

I mean in laptops in general, really. :lol: I'd happily pay more for a better included battery, so that the spare I'd otherwise end up with wouldn't go to waste.


Anyway, I agree, lower power consumption is the way to go, definitely.

 

[CPUnltd]

Apple can not currently move to ARM or any other architecture before Windows does so due to contractual situations... the only reason that MAC made the move to x86 is because they were dying and microsoft had to bail them out (by buying >50% of Apple) in order to keep themselves from being a commercial monopoly... Linux is obviously a competitor as well, but it's not a commercial competitor, so they don't come into play with America and big business... The secondary reason is that PPC is capable of outperforming x86 (as is seen in the PS3... the fact that it has been legally capable of running linux is NOT the only reason military establishments have been using them in server farms... in the realm of raw power, XBox 360 is leaps and bounds behind... by all regards, 360 is an x86 system that is extremely proprietary and locked down... but it's still x86 nonetheless. When all said and done, the only way I can see ARM making real headway in the desktop market is if they make it non-embedded, or give it a way to easily be swapped for a newer version when released... that's way too common amongst desktops to be lost by switching to something better but with less mod capabilities... Average Joe will never really know the difference, but they aren't marketing for them simply because they won't know the difference, so there's no reason... they would be targeting builders, modders and custom creators as well as large scale mfgs, but large scale mfgs don't really make the bulk of revenue for this sort of thing... if they did, Intel and AMD wouldn't have so many variations of their processors on the shelves in retail stores. Of course, we could start the game all over and return to the days when modding or custom building was near impossible for PCs, but I don't see the masses being willing to repeat that experience... though I could be wrong. All in all, just my opinion on the matter...

 

[Prometheus]

I thought that the Xbox 360 was also a PowerPC-based machine? Also, didn't Microsoft have to pay up for stealing QuickTime code, rather than Apple "dying"? Moreover, the moving of the Macintosh computers to x86 was a long, long time after that, wasn't it?


Am I mistaken?

 

[CPUnltd]

they all played a role in the overall concept I pointed out... but when all said and done, look into it... Microsoft owns a decent percentage of Apple... and can you think of a reason for Apple to move to x86 when they were doing so well on PPC?