ron minnich wrote:
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 11:16 AM, W B Hacker <w...@conducive.org> wrote:
Anyone know if the AMD environment is any more 'open'?
way, way, more open. same with via. They regularly contribute chipset
source code to coreboot. That's my measure.
I hadn't paid much attention to the ARM until the recent '2 GHz' blurb, but
that's a game-changer.
I think the PC guys have got to start watching the rear view mirror.
I've seen the transition from mainframe->mini->workstation->pc in
several sectors, and one driving factor was openness. Each time a
given vendor class got into this "crown jewels and core IP" mode, and
started locking out the users, something come along to knock it off
its perch.
Varian Data, General Automation, SDS/XDS, DEC, Data General, Honeywell, CDC, GE,
Singer, Friden.... the IT roadside is littered with those 'late holocene'
deposits...
> And, in each case, the newcomer was initially slower and
not quite as good was what it replaced, which led to the status quo
vendors to ignore it until it was too late.
Excuses are eerily the same, each time, almost without regard to the
product family:
"nobody else wants that"
"we no longer release that information"
etc. etc. etc.
It's amazing.
ron
Emphaticaly so!
And the march goes on...
Look at the common-sense approach of the latest Nokia PDA hardware gadget.
Puts the average desktop of a decade ago in the shade in all but physical size.
CPU is CPU, graphics and signal processing each get their own processors and
clock rates.
BFBI, but it sure unloads the CPU and makes powering-down what isn't required at
the moment far easier.
Too sad it didn't use an inherently leaner kernel . . .
;-)
Bill
