People are still gonna need PCs for a while and as Windows does not run on ARM it seems a bit early for an x86 death.
The End of x86?
51–60 of 119 posts
Re: The End of x86?
#52As I wrote in a similar thread I think Intel and x86 is already dead - the writing is on the wall - Intel just doesn't know it yet. Below is how I believe a key customer has already planned to leave the x86 architecture as nothing but a footnote in their history (alongside the remnants of PowerPC).
---
Currently Apple relies on Intel for a major component in a key product. Strategically, Apple doesn't like to have to rely on a single source or supplier for key products. Apple will do whatever is possible to remove this reliance.
Hence a prediction: within less than 5 years a Mac will be running on an Apple designed ARM processor.
How? By slowly, step by step, providing a way towards this.
Step 1. Migrate your OS to the new architecture (e.g. iOS already, OS X not far behind) - done
Step 2. Migrate your developer base onto developer tools which you control and can easily change the architecture it targets (e.g. Xcode and LLVM) - done
Step 3. Provide a space where problematic applications which use other VMs or rely directly on getting too close to the hardware are not welcome (e.g. a Mac App Store) - announced
Step 4. Change the marketplace behaviour so that you control how the majority of applications are distributed and can quickly provide updates without user intervention. Such as an App store.
Step 5. Release a new Macbook with an ARM processor, absolutely killing on form factor, price and battery performance that Intel cannot compete with. Encourage your Mac App Store developers to flick a switch in Xcode, to recompile and upload their new Universal (x86 & ARM) versions of their Apps to the Mac App Store.
Result: you now control the processor direction and application distribution mechanism for a key product and no longer rely upon the whims of Intel.
Apple is all about controlling an integrated experience for their customers. Currently Intel is getting in the way of this for the Mac product.
Re: The End of x86?
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
If we compare the RISC nature of ARM with the CISC-implemented-over-RISC approach of contemporary x86s, it's easy to believe it will prove simpler to upscale ARM than to downscale the Atom. Transmeta-style emulation could be one possible way out of this death spiral for Intel.
History has shown that intel is very good at getting out of potential death spirals...
Indeed - they are not dying anytime soon. See also this:
http://codingrelic.geekhold.com/2010/08/x86-vs-arm-mobile-cp...
for why ARM's technical advantages may be overblown.
Re: The End of x86?
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Neither Apple iOS or Android were "build from nothing in 2-3 years". iOS is based on OS-X, which is based on NeXT, which is based on BSD (~40 years of work) Android is based on Linux (so ~20 years of work)
My point is that they went from zero apps and zero users to lots in 2-3 years. IMO the argument that Windows backwards compatibility is the only way to get the long tail of tens of thousands of apps has been refuted.
Oh right. Yes, I agree, then.
All a new platforms needs is a great webbrowser (which these days seems to mean "port webkit") and it's instantly viable.
Re: The End of x86?
#55I'm not going to write off Intel yet, but they're in a dangerous position. The number one reason Microsoft's stock has been moribund the past ten years is that Linux took over the datacenter. Imagine how much more revenue they'd have if the millions upon millions of X86 servers deployed since 2000 ran Windows. Instead, they're stuck in a saturated, slow-growth monopoly. If non-x86 chips take off in data centers, Inte…
... And windows will be locked out of the datacenter until they create ARM-compatible versions of windows.
Next thing you know Windows runs on both ARM and x86 (with x86 emulation for applications) and pushes x86 out of the commercial / domestic arena.
Re: The End of x86?
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
History has shown that intel is very good at getting out of potential death spirals...
Yes but back then they had someone who understood disruption much better (Andry Grove was friend with the author of Innovator's Dilemma) and they never had to change the x86 platform. They only had to create simpler chips on the same platform (Celeron, Atom, the initial laptop chips - forgot their name). This time however, they need to change the whole platform, because the whole platform brings much bigger inefficie…
The GPU is increasingly more important (accelerating the UI, the browser, Flash, supporting higher resolutions, gaming, etc)
Don't forget offloading computation from the CPU like voice/face/gesture recognition and number crunching (there must be some use for that in a cellphone). And OpenCL is already providing a hardware-independent abstraction layer for that.
Re: The End of x86?
#57The tagline from Innovator's Dilemma is that well-managed companies can get into trouble when they are being disrupted. The reason is that it's normally good business to get rid of low-margin products and focus your resources on the ones that make the most money. And then someone takes over the low end and expands into the high end. But Intel is not falling for that one. They have made the Atom, a slow, cheap, low-po…
The technical advantages of ARM aren't that great.
Don't forget we are talking about CPUs that are getting close to Pentium 3 class performance. Intel proved back in the Pentium vs PowerPC days that x86 can compete well against superior architectures. In this fight they have a lot more performance to work with.
I do agree with your CPU-becoming-commoditized point, but Intel is very aware of that (cite: how they keep Atom performance just enough higher than ARM, but a lot slower than their more profitable higher end chips). It's a difficult area, but Intel is aware of the balancing act they have to do. I think their strategy is to increase performance of non-CPU components of their chipsets (ie, make sure Atom kills ARM on I/O) in order to keep their lead in the datacenter.
Re: The End of x86?
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
History has shown that intel is very good at getting out of potential death spirals...
Intel's x86 killed the RISC workstation with Windows compatibility and price per MIPS. Intel then matched and surpassed AMD on AMD64 counting on its own size and on the complexity of building a very fast 64-bit x86. All factors, Windows compatibility excepted, are on ARM's side this time. Of course Intel has survived bad situations before, but this time I am not betting on them.
Which factors exactly on ARM's side?
I can think of only two:
1) Power usage on low end chips. ARM will be ahead of x86 on platforms below the smartphone for the foreseeable future, and on smartphones for another generation (2-3 years)
2) Manufactures can customize ARM to build SOCs. I can't see Intel allowing complete customization like that, but I'd expect them to ship some competitive SOCs themselves.
Re: The End of x86?
#59The tagline from Innovator's Dilemma is that well-managed companies can get into trouble when they are being disrupted. The reason is that it's normally good business to get rid of low-margin products and focus your resources on the ones that make the most money. And then someone takes over the low end and expands into the high end. But Intel is not falling for that one. They have made the Atom, a slow, cheap, low-po…
The technical advantages of ARM aren't that great. Don't forget we are talking about CPUs that are getting close to Pentium 3 class performance. Intel proved back in the Pentium vs PowerPC days that x86 can compete well against superior architectures. In this fight they have a lot more performance to work with. I do agree with your CPU-becoming-commoditized point, but Intel is very aware of that (cite: how they keep…
The technical advantages of ARM aren't _that_ great.
True - see also this:
http://codingrelic.geekhold.com/2010/08/x86-vs-arm-mobile-cp...
However, if x86 has neither a process or a compatibility advantage, then even a tiny technical disadvantage turns into a tiny extra cost, which can be important for high volume chips.
Re: The End of x86?
#60Does anyone have any data that they can share on the following -- as a company, if I licensed the latest generation ARM processor (e.g., Cortex-A15) and then factored in any additional design and manufacturing costs (e.g., via a foundry), what would be the total cost advantage of using an ARM chip versus a comparable Intel chip (e.g., Atom)? Thanks!