Pandora Needs To Go X86 (eventually)

[Exophase]

x86 is the dead end. Soon or not, we'll even see higher end desktops using ARM which will be capable of running Crysis at maximum setting, while x86 being trapped due to the fact that 6.0ghz processors wouldn't make any difference over a 3.2ghz one. Sure, it would be fast as hell but what it could be useful? Scientific use, which I don't think that a normal user will want to run.

Now that's just crazy, people are still buying better and faster processors, why would you expect that they'd be happy forever with the ones we have now? ARM is way behind on that front and it'll be hard to catch up as long as Intel keeps pushing forward.

One question, is ARM already 64 bits?

Nope. Staying 32bits is probably part of the power consumption plan, 64bit register files and ALUs must come at at least some price (although the L1 dcache path is already 64bits)

 

[Username]

One question, is ARM already 64 bits?
Nope. Staying 32bits is probably part of the power consumption plan, 64bit register files and ALUs must come at at least some price (although the L1 dcache path is already 64bits)
That's not necessarily a bad thing though. The 64 bit Vista I tried was terrible (if you already thought Vista was bad...). There was rarely ever anything compatible, software was buggy, and it would also crash often.

 

[Exophase]

One question, is ARM already 64 bits?
Nope. Staying 32bits is probably part of the power consumption plan, 64bit register files and ALUs must come at at least some price (although the L1 dcache path is already 64bits)
That's not necessarily a bad thing though. The 64 bit Vista I tried was terrible (if you already thought Vista was bad...). There was rarely ever anything compatible, software was buggy, and it would also crash often.

These kinds of transitions take time... in the case of x86-64 they changed a lot more than just making the registers and address space 64bits.

On the other hand, Linux has been doing OK in 64bits for years, even before x86-64. There are some exceptions of course, but generally it's pretty well suited.

 

[CCmachined]

stop the bickering: right now, here's what a x86-based Pandora would be if it were x86 all along, compared to the current pandora:

-Battery life halved or less [!]
-Case size and/or weight increased 50% or more [!]
-Cost of device increased around 30-50% [!]
-Can run x86 linux applications but not those using OpenGL, only GL ES, no games do
-Can run a number of games and apps through wine excluding 3D as OpenGL is missing
-Can run full flash but slow on the low-powered CPU with the Flash Linux build
(as is the case with netbooks youtube can be done on ARM easily with flv scripts etc)

-Can run Windows (But who'd really want that on this handheld)?

so the only real advantages are:
Can run a number of games and apps through wine, excluding 3D as OpenGL is missing
Can run x86 linux applications that aren't 3D/2D accelerated games, allowing us to run heavy unoptomised desktop-oriented applications that will cut down battery life further

Sure wine can be ported to use GL ES, but the work to do so is a lot and this problem only cuts down on what already runs in wine. Every advantage an x86 Pandora has is simply not of much use to the hacker linux crowd that we are, and is simply not worth the disadvantages and catches.

We are ARM and we rule, this is a UMPC but mostly a gaming handheld, so battery life and size are bloody important. We will have some form of Flash anyway (even if it has to be gnash / swfdec: youtube will work regardless), WiFi internet, USB port, full windowing desktop, productivity, games, multimedia, and more, for 9-10 hours or more, plus we're a much smaller device than a x86 UMPC or netbook with much much greater battery life. This is a UMPC by any definition except if it states "x86" or "Windows" in which case is a stupid definition anyway as those things are bad for this class of machine as stated above.

 

[craigix]

Since there is currently no x86 solution for a device the size of the Pandora this is kind of academic.

By the time Intel make something we will be seeing OMAP4 + Cortex9.

I'm in the x86 is dying camp right now, things could change but Intel have a lot of catching up to do (if it's even possible to make x86 as efficient as, say OMAP4).

Oh and for the record I have absolutely zero interest in bundling an over priced and slow OS such as vista with any future Pandora.

 

[nicfer]

Well, then x86 should stay in the desktop/DRL (Desktop Replacement Laptop) section, ARM in PDAs/Gaming handhelds/etc. and the netbook/nettops/MIDs/UMPCs section being shared by both of them, since they require too much power for ARM and too few energy for x86. I think that in a future both x86 will be low powered enough to be used on phones and ARM powerful enough for a desktop, so them will reach the opposite points of their designed purpose.

Cooperation wins.

 

[midna25]

It's painfully obvious that someone just cannot jet go of the piece of sh*t that is Microsoft Wyndoze. (Loses all seriousness)

Linux and ARM are the way to salvation! Repent! Repent while there is still time!

 

[PoisonedV]

True Story: Unix > Linux

 

[trats20050]

WOW i learned so much today.

 

[Klaus]

True Story: Unix > Linux

Yeah, let's start another off topic subdiscussion! So, what makes every single Unix out there better than any given Linux distro? And to add even more fun, are BSDs true Unices or not?

 

[Ravnos]

True Story: Unix > Linux

Yeah, let's start another off topic subdiscussion! So, what makes every single Unix out there better than any given Linux distro? And to add even more fun, are BSDs true Unices or not?

The BSDs are only called "Unix-like" because calling an OS "Unix" requires licensing fees. As AT&T learned, there is as much, if not more BSD code in most modern Unices than System V code. Anyone who argues that the BSDs are not "true" Unix is really just arguing semantics. Since virtually all modern Unix OSes (except Linux, of course) descend from either System V or BSD Unix, it is tough to make the argument that Free/Open/Net/DragonflyBSD are not true Unix given their lineage.

 

[mdefender]

Given all the spastic and ignorant vitriol, how about I abandon all arguments except this one:

I want wine. I want to play old Windows games, and I will accept halved battery life as a penalty (because really, 5 hours is more than enough, and will be possible with x86 in the very near future.)

I think that your average user will not care too much about an insanely long battery life. If I had 10 hours to game every day, I would have a 70" TV to do it on.

I also think that your average oldschool-loving gamer has at least a couple old Windows games they are quite fond of. Come on. Sim City 2000, Civilization 2 or 3, Starcraft, Thief: The Dark Project, Battlefield 1942...

Forget the compatibility issues. Just consider the ultimate emulating handheld console. How can Pandora be 'ultimate' if it can't emulate Windows at playable speeds?

EDIT: deserves a topic onto its own, I think, because this topic has been completely drowned in replies by people telling me that I'm stupid for wanting flash OR that flash 10 support is right around the corner (HA.)

 

[Exophase]

I want wine. I want to play old Windows games, and I will accept halved battery life as a penalty (because really, 5 hours is more than enough, and will be possible with x86 in the very near future.)

Alright, very good. Now maybe you can learn between things you personally want and what everyone else wants, no, needs to do, as you put it.

Wow, it actually sounds kind of selfish!

 

[plopperz]

How can Pandora be 'ultimate' if it can't emulate Windows at playable speeds?

I'm sorry, but I have to sig this :lol:

 

[mdefender]

Care to drop the glibness and explain what's so funny about that? Are you anti-PC gaming? I hate to sound elitist, but most modern console games I've seen are pale imitations of their PC ancestors.

EDIT: With the obvious exception of platformers and party games.

 

[dsleaf67]

Sorry but I think then he might as well update his statement to include all. Maybe something like

How can Pandora be "ultimate" if it can't emulate Windows, PS2, XBox and Gamecube at playable speeds?

After all, they are all popular old now and mainstream

 

[PoisonedV]

Care to drop the glibness and explain what's so funny about that? Are you anti-PC gaming? I hate to sound elitist, but most modern console games I've seen are pale imitations of their PC ancestors.

EDIT: With the obvious exception of platformers and party games.

Please shut your whore mouth.

 

[mdefender]

Astonishing.

Are you aware that Windows has been around for just a *wee* bit longer than the PS2?

Wanting to play a 2d Windows 95 game (like, say, Lode Runner Online) is a far cry from emulating the previous generation of consoles.

Also, technically speaking Wine is not an emulator. It's a compatibility layer. This means it runs at near full speed. Meaning, even modern games can be played... the only limiting factors are Wine compatibility and video acceleration requirements (vs. whatever video card your handheld is using.)

Comparing wine to gamecube or PS2 emulation is laughable.

 

[Username]

Given all the spastic and ignorant vitriol, how about I abandon all arguments except this one:

I want wine. I want to play old Windows games, and I will accept halved battery life as a penalty (because really, 5 hours is more than enough, and will be possible with x86 in the very near future.)

It would be about half battery life at most. That'd be without playing anything processor intense (maybe web browsing), and you also have to accept all of the heating issues (please tell me how nice a hot Nintendo DS would be to hold). Don't (ignorantly) call people ignorant when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[mdefender]

Someone who compares wine to gamecube emulation is SHOCKINGLY ignorant, sorry.

Heating can be mitigated with proper design, using insulating materials where it is held. It would actually be far more pleasant than trying to use a laptop or netbook on your lap.

I HATE x86. I hate the heat and the power consumption as much as the next guy. It is why I have bought several ARM devices. It is why I haven't bought a netbook.

That doesn't change the fact that, at present, it is required in order to do certain things. People who blindly proclaim that flash 10 support is just around the corner are deluded at best and ignorant at worst, especially when they imply (like one person did) that developers care more about open source than proprietary platforms like Symbian and Windows Mobile.

EDIT: On the other hand, I am not deluded when I say that reasonably power-efficient (within 50% of ARM) embedded x86 is are just around the corner, within the next year or so. They need to work on the chipsets. Plus, when you compare full CPU loads (such as those required in heavy gaming), ARM's advantages become less pronounced.