Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
I'm left more than a little bit speechless at this bit of nonsense.
Intel talks Linux, netbooks and rivalry with ARM (ZDNet Asia)
Posted Oct 9, 2009 13:12 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
taken care of... more or less. But not Adobe flash.
Posted Oct 9, 2009 13:21 UTC (Fri) by johill (subscriber, #25196)
Posted Oct 9, 2009 15:28 UTC (Fri) by drag (subscriber, #31333)
It thought it was a big thing in the tech news lately that Apple is refusing
to support Flash online with their iPhone. (They have a program that allows
people to program native iPhone apps in Adobe Flash's tools, but that is not
nearly the same thing)
But the Flash Lite stuff only supports Flash 8 features as far I can tell.
Poor argument for x86
Posted Oct 9, 2009 21:56 UTC (Fri) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
Posted Oct 12, 2009 2:52 UTC (Mon) by jamesh (guest, #1159)
When they finally released specifications for the protocol, it omitted a description of the RTMPE encryption protocol. Furthermore, the license on the specification forbids people from using the specification to reverse engineer the encryption protocol.
And when the protocol was reverse engineered (which happened before the spec release), they used a bogus DMCA take down notice to get the code deleted from SourceForge.
What do you think they are going to do with Gnash or Swfdec gets to the point where they can play RTMPE streams?
Posted Oct 15, 2009 4:34 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190)
Posted Oct 9, 2009 16:00 UTC (Fri) by MarkWilliamson (guest, #30166)
I suspect that as their mobile processors get more efficient we'll see less of these status quo arguments and more in terms of technical benefits - but it seems like Intel has a long way to go before they get down to the power draw of the ARM platform.
Posted Oct 10, 2009 17:51 UTC (Sat) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)
I don't think Intel care. Their strategy as of late seems to be 'x86 everywhere at any cost'. Most of their community projects could be seen as a way of shoehorning x86 somewhere. They have realized that x86 is their core piece of real estate and their means of survival will be to encourage the view of x86 as the 'only compatible choice'. Even when that makes no real sense.
And as a result all of us lot are going to end up programming everywhere for a horrible ISA with chips that spend half their power decoding instructions.
Posted Oct 11, 2009 1:24 UTC (Sun) by MarkWilliamson (guest, #30166)
They do seem very focused on getting x86 everywhere at the moment - graphics cards, phones ... I'm a little divided on this. On the one hand I'd certainly want to see as competitive a market as possible, so if Intel dominate every niche then that would be bad for the industry as a whole. On the other hand I can see many benefits if there were a "universal ISA". That said, x86 would hardly be my first choice for the one ISA to rule them all; it's probably not the ugliest ISA in history but it's hardly pleasant. And I wouldn't want to see a world in which new architecture approaches were locked out simply because everything is x86 (more than is the case already).
As far as I'm concerned their community work is positive whatever their motivations, in that the code is not all Intel-specific (e.g. some of the enhancements to bootup they made for Moblin). It does seem slightly bizarre that they're focusing so hard on "x86 everywhere" though - the Xscale, their StrongARM variant, was pretty awesome as far as I know. It seems quite strange to get rid of that, even given the existence of Atom. I wonder if it's a decision that will pay off... will they actually save themselves design and manufacturing effort this way, or are they simply hoping that software compatibility will win the day. An interesting gamble; I'm a little doubtful that we won't have Adobe Flash on ARM phones before we have a good selection of popular x86 phones on the market.
I do think it's fairly impressive that Intel has (mostly) taken the relatively enlightened view that they're not (mostly) a software company and certainly not a driver-selling company. Open Source work is something they seem to have embraced in order to sell more hardware and improve the market they're operating in. Although things are better than they were, certain other device companies could still learn a thing or two from this.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds