Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 1 hr, 28 mins ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 13 hrs ago - more...
|
2010-12-30
, 22:24
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by Radu
CPU emulation pretty much kills the idea of why you want to use ARM in the first place - you would be burning far more juice than if you used an Atom in the first place. The xbox360 has a lot (*lot*) more CPU power than any current generation ARM CPU. I mean, just take a look at dosbox and similar emulators on the N900 - we kinda top off at early 386 speeds...
I think it is pretty doable for a company like MS. They have experience with that from their Xbox360 project, and doing a good JIT code translation thing shouldn't be that hard for a company with so much money and experience.
Of course, it won't be anywhere near native speeds (since usually an X86 instruction takes like 3-5 ARM instructions to emulate) but it could be good enough for some non very CPU intensive programs.
... but the whole discussion reminds me of the Transmeta story - architecturally very different hardware shoehorned into X86 app ecosystem compatibility.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:01
|
|
Posts: 303 |
Thanked: 146 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
|
#23
|
DosBox is very inefficient. Someone wrote a dynamic code translation thing and got very nice speeds (something like 100 times faster than DoSBox).
Anyway, I am not saying that the speed would be nice, but it would work for some applications that are not very demanding. And ideally, people would compile their software with ARM support, which shouldn't take much if any work in most cases. I mean, how many programs use inline asm?
Anyway, I am not saying that the speed would be nice, but it would work for some applications that are not very demanding. And ideally, people would compile their software with ARM support, which shouldn't take much if any work in most cases. I mean, how many programs use inline asm?
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:05
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#24
|
Will Windows 8 on Arm let you browse the web with flash, Watch a movie, listen to music, send email, read an Ebook, and use Microsoft office. If the Arm version of windows 8 lets you do all of those basic things then what it the problem? Windows on Arm would be targeted at lower power devices like netbooks, umpcs, or tablets.
Last edited by railroadmaster; 2010-12-30 at 23:08.
Last edited by railroadmaster; 2010-12-30 at 23:08.
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:25
|
|
Posts: 303 |
Thanked: 146 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
|
#25
|
But for those tasks you can use Meego, Android, etc. So there would be no advantage in running Windows.
Of course, not using Microsoft Office, but Open office or something.
Of course, not using Microsoft Office, but Open office or something.
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:31
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by railroadmaster
The problem is that just for those tasks, you don't need to port a jumbo-jet sized OS that comes with a boatload of backwards-compatibility issues and that is geared towards far more generous HW resource usage. In fact, that is the very problem that spawned Windows CE in the first place.
Will Windows 8 on Arm let you browse the web with flash, Watch a movie, listen to music, send email, read an Ebook, and use Microsoft office. If the Arm version of windows 8 lets you do all of those basic things then what it the problem? Windows on Arm would be targeted at lower power devices like netbooks, umpcs, or tablets.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:40
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by Radu
Yes but that is exactly the problem with Linux on Arm it isn't Windows with Internet Explorer or Microsoft Office. As much as I like Linux and use it myself it still isn't Windows and that is the problem every linux distro has no matter how user friendly it is. People use Windows because they are familiar with the interface, Internet Explorer, and Microsoft office.
But for those tasks you can use Meego, Android, etc. So there would be no advantage in running Windows.
Of course, not using Microsoft Office, but Open office or something.
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:46
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#28
|
Ah, the paradigm that since ARM is power efficient, Windows is familiar, so if we put Windows on ARM it would be familiar AND power efficient ! Well, sadly, it's not that easy, as a good deal of that power efficiency comes from the OS and applications written with that in mind - something that is not really true for either Windows or most windows applications 
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:52
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by attila77
Well Arm processors are already more than powerful enough to run Windows for the tasks that I described all it would take is a Arm Cortex a9, the Upcoming arm cortex a15, a dual core Snapdragon, or a Tripple or Quad Core Marvell Armada, a decent amount of ram 1gb or 2gb, and enough storage like 32gb flash or 160gb of hard disk. If Microsoft did some optimizations and got flash and silverlight running well that would be all your average consumer needs.
The problem is that just for those tasks, you don't need to port a jumbo-jet sized OS that comes with a boatload of backwards-compatibility issues and that is geared towards far more generous HW resource usage. In fact, that is the very problem that spawned Windows CE in the first place.
|
|
2010-12-30
, 23:54
|
|
Posts: 303 |
Thanked: 146 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by railroadmaster
The problem is, Windows 7, as it is, would be useless for cellphones because the interface is totally not designed for cellphones or tablets.
Yes but that is exactly the problem with Linux on Arm it isn't Windows with Internet Explorer or Microsoft Office. As much as I like Linux and use it myself it still isn't Windows and that is the problem every linux distro has no matter how user friendly it is. People use Windows because they are familiar with the interface, Internet Explorer, and Microsoft office.
It needs a keyboard, mouse, and a large screen.
 |
| Tags |
| die ms die, microfail |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 19:10.
Of course, it won't be anywhere near native speeds (since usually an X86 instruction takes like 3-5 ARM instructions to emulate) but it could be good enough for some non very CPU intensive programs.