Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Intel acquires Linux mobile developers for Atom (ZDNet UK)
ZDNet UK covers
the Intel acquisition of Opened Hand, a London-based company which
specializes in mobile Linux development and services. "Opened Hand
will focus on participating in the Moblin Software Platform community,
which is developing a Linux software stack for Intel's Atom processors. The
software will be optimised for low-power netbooks and 'mobile internet
devices'."
(Log in to post comments)
Intel acquires Linux mobile developers for Atom (ZDNet UK) Posted Aug 30, 2008 4:47 UTC (Sat) by yycinter (guest, #27631) [Link]
finally Intel got official linux dist
Intel acquires Linux mobile developers for Atom (ZDNet UK) Posted Aug 30, 2008 10:38 UTC (Sat) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link]
Doubt that: they used to work with Ubuntu and recently announced a switch to Fedora. They most probably wan developers to work on the Moblin 2.0 spec and code.
Good! Posted Aug 30, 2008 11:30 UTC (Sat) by kripkenstein (subscriber, #43281) [Link]
Sounds like good news for the projects they work on, and I'm sure it's good news for the OpenedHand people themselves. In my experience they have been always friendly and very good at what they do, so they certainly deserve this success.
Also nice to see Intel making more moves towards open source friendliness.
Intel acquires Linux mobile developers for Atom (ZDNet UK) Posted Aug 30, 2008 13:46 UTC (Sat) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402) [Link]
And the Intel mobile steamroller presses on. Clearly they believe controlling as much of the embedded linux landscape as possible will help them crush ARM and MIPS and allow them to squeeze their Atoms into ever more inappropriate places.
Not a bad thing for Free software, but a bad thing for those of us who don't want to be programming god-forsaken x86 for the rest of our lives.
Intel acquires Linux mobile developers for Atom (ZDNet UK) Posted Aug 30, 2008 17:29 UTC (Sat) by bryanr (guest, #25324) [Link]
Linux + gcc hide x86 brain damage pretty well from the average developer.
Intel has a long way to go technically but I think its good to see them
Intel hardware not up to their fabs... Posted Sep 1, 2008 0:58 UTC (Mon) by HalfMoon (guest, #3211) [Link] If they ever get the architecture right (ditch the stone age bridge chips), with their awesome fabs they should be able to push technology forward (putting some real pressure on ARM + MIPS). Agree that their fab tech should be getting them further than it has, but could you elaborate on what you mean by stone age bridge chips? I'd assume that for embedded systems sensitive to cost and (more my end) power, needing more than one chip (SOC plus south bridge) is a designed-in lose. Single-chip systems are the name of that game! Is that what you meant, or were you thinking there's something about how their south bridges work (not their mere existence) which makes trouble?
Intel hardware not up to their fabs... Posted Sep 3, 2008 18:27 UTC (Wed) by jlokier (guest, #52227) [Link]
Last time I looked, you could get lovely fast, cheap Atom motherboards from Intel with no heatsink or fan on the CPU.... but a massive one of each on the Northbridge.
They'll need to replace that Northbridge before it's suitable for silent, or low-power, or fan-incompatible applications.
Effect on Free Software Posted Sep 1, 2008 15:16 UTC (Mon) by pjm (subscriber, #2080) [Link] > … crush ARM and MIPS and allow them to squeeze their Atoms into ever more inappropriate places. > Not a bad thing for Free software It seems to be easier to have a good selection of Free Software [or at least source-visible software with enough of a license to fix portability issues] available on multiple platforms than proprietary: Debian has much the same software (~20,000 packages) on each of half a dozen or so architectures, whereas traditional proprietary binary-only software availability on a platform depends on more different providers deciding to support that platform. This makes me think that popularity of lots of different architectures is a good thing for Free Software (and conversely that reduced popularity of different architectures is a bad thing for Free Software). If OpenedHand's acquisition means that OpenedHand has more resources for developing software good for handheld devices of many architectures, then that is a good thing for Free Software; if, however, the acquisition means that OpenedHand staff now target Intel-specific work to the detriment of other architectures, then I believe that to be a bad thing for Free Software.
|
|
||||||||||||