Live data from Hacker News

Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

theinquirer.net

21–30 of 72 posts

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#21
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Option 3. It's probably not that they can't but more that they won't because they aren't going to make any cash out of it with Linux. It's also because they are scared of ARM getting a head start on Win8 tablets. If they do this with a Core 2 and an IGP, then I'll start worrying.

No cash with Linux? Seriously? Why does the idea that Linux is incompatible with profit still persevere? It's especially ridiculous considering the rise of Android.

Not for this product. Their desktop and server propositions are where the cash is with Linux.

Android is pretty much all over ARM. They aren't going to get a look in there easily. Windows 8 is a great opportunity as it's a fresh platform.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#22
post #18

Couple of ways to take this: 1) Microsoft has exerted leverage over Intel and got them to go down the preferred supplier route. Possible, and not overly surprising. 2) Intel is trying to carve a niche out and thinks its best bet is with the old hound. 3) The boring technical reason that there's loads of implementation and they can't be bothered making the changes to the Linux packages. It sounds like it'll run but wi…

Option 3 has no basis since Intel doesn't need to write a single line of code to get their new chip supported under Linux, they just need to release the specs. Which brings us to: 4) Just like many graphics chips, this processor does some black magic to boost performance and Intel doesn't want to give any clues to competitors by releasing specs and/or open drivers.

Most likely not performance as in rendering performance, but as in power saving; wasn't this also NVIDIA's reason for not releasing specs to Linux developers?

I actually have some sympathy with a hardware company in this position; if all your competitive advantage is in actually in software, open source is a tricky proposition. Nobody cares about the driver interface to the rendering pipeline any more - I imagine it's heavily dictated by the need to make open standards fast (eg. OpenGL). Power saving? That's a whole different ballgame.

It's a real pain that there are no useful standards for power saving - I've had to disable almost all of the cool processor features on my DAW (C-states, core parking, EIST) because they completely wreck real-time audio latencies, and cause clicks and glitches in DAW software (using external FireWire audio hardware). I notice that Cubase on Windows 7 dynamically installs a different power saving profile on startup, but presumably that means running it as Administrator, and we're back to the bad old days of running as root everywhere.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#23

Where would Intel be without Microsoft today??? They need windows to continue to succeed. ARM chips are the enemy of Intel, thus IOS and Android/linux are the enemy of Intel.

For the left hand, maybe.

Meanwhile, the right hand is busy porting Jelly Bean to their x86/Android phones: http://www.zdnet.com/intel-ports-android-jelly-bean-to-x86-p...

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#24
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd bet on 3, too. Sounds like they slapped the only good-enough gfx core they are sure will work on an Atom, so they'd have something that at least works well with Windows 8 at launch. The next-gen Atom cores will use the same gfx core as their Ivy Bridge processors, but that won't be ready for some time.

It probably means Windows 8 is the only OS it supports. Even Windows 7 might not work on it.

Much like the Medfield SoC it derives from, I suspect Clover Trail doesn't use a BIOS or various basic I/O lines and conventions that have been standard in the PC world for decades. So yeah, I wouldn't expect a stock Win7 to run at all.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#25
post #5

Well... I'm not going to buy anything with that stupid chip then. Period.

Why buy the bully chips at all? Intel was always like that, therefore most of my PCs were on AMD where possible.

"like that"? What does that mean?

I see them usually releasing good quality drivers for graphics (http://intellinuxgraphics.org/) and wireless (http://intellinuxwireless.org/ until they got into main kernel). This is the least problematic hardware I had to deal with.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#26
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Option 3. It's probably not that they can't but more that they won't because they aren't going to make any cash out of it with Linux. It's also because they are scared of ARM getting a head start on Win8 tablets. If they do this with a Core 2 and an IGP, then I'll start worrying.

No cash with Linux? Seriously? Why does the idea that Linux is incompatible with profit still persevere? It's especially ridiculous considering the rise of Android.

Android has made Nokia nearly bankrupt already, Siemens/BenQ has stopped making mobile phones while Android existed. Windows CE/Mobile/whatever seems to have no chance on the market anymore, eventhough they seem technical superior! Palm completely failed with its WebOS.

In fact Blackberry is the last survivor of the old cellphone world. (EDIT: And Samsung of course, but they are just copying Apple stuff and get sued for it.)

The only ones having profit from Android are Google and HTC. Google because they created the system and run the App Store. HTC because they manufacture the reference devices and because they are cheaper than the rest.

Wake up mates, open source destroys the old business models.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#28
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No cash with Linux? Seriously? Why does the idea that Linux is incompatible with profit still persevere? It's especially ridiculous considering the rise of Android.

Android has made Nokia nearly bankrupt already, Siemens/BenQ has stopped making mobile phones while Android existed. Windows CE/Mobile/whatever seems to have no chance on the market anymore, eventhough they seem technical superior! Palm completely failed with its WebOS. In fact Blackberry is the last survivor of the old cellphone world. (EDIT: And Samsung of course, but they are just copying Apple stuff and get sued…

I thought that MS made a stack of cash from Android via patent extortion methods?

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#29
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No cash with Linux? Seriously? Why does the idea that Linux is incompatible with profit still persevere? It's especially ridiculous considering the rise of Android.

Android has made Nokia nearly bankrupt already, Siemens/BenQ has stopped making mobile phones while Android existed. Windows CE/Mobile/whatever seems to have no chance on the market anymore, eventhough they seem technical superior! Palm completely failed with its WebOS. In fact Blackberry is the last survivor of the old cellphone world. (EDIT: And Samsung of course, but they are just copying Apple stuff and get sued…

Google made only $550 million from Android between 2008 and 2011 according to figures from the Oracle trial (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/mar/29/google-earn...), compared to $38 billion in total revenues for 2011. While half a billion over three years is not trivial, it is rather insignificant compared to $38 billion over one year for search advertising. Trefis analysis of Google's stock price estimates the value of non-Motorola Google Phone properties at 2.38% of their total stock value (http://www.trefis.com/company?hm=GOOG.trefis#/GOOG/n-1336?fr...). To use Warren Buffet terms (as per an analysis by Bill Gurley via Erick Schonfeld), Android is not Google's castle, it's their moat. (http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/25/search-googles-castle-moat). The point of Android (and to a lesser extent, Chrome OS) isn't to generate revenue itself but to protect search revenue (if, for example, iOS were to switch to Bing by default). Given that Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer had stated in 2010, that iOS's App Store ran at about the breakeven point, and was therefore not a significant source of revenue for Apple, (http://appleinsider.com/articles/10/01/26/app_store_wildly_s...) it is not wholly unbelievable that Google Play would also be an insignificant source of revenue for Google (especially given the ratio of free apps to paid apps is higher on Google Play than on the App Store).

As for HTC: "HTC Corp. said Friday its unaudited second-quarter net profit fell 58% from a year earlier, as the Taiwanese smartphone maker struggles to compete with industry leaders Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. HTC said in a statement its unaudited net profit for the three months ended June 30 was $7.40 billion New Taiwan dollars ($247 million), down from NT$17.52 billion a year earlier. Its revenue dropped 27% to NT$91.0 billion from NT$124.40 billion." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230414120457751...).

You are also incorrect about HTC manufacturing the reference devices. While they did make the Google Nexus One, the Google Nexus S was Samsung, the Google Galaxy Nexus was Samsung, the Motorola Xoom was technically the Honeycomb reference device (read as: Nexus), and the Google Nexus 7 is Asus. In other words, HTC has manufactured only one of the five Nexus devices (out of six if you count the Nexus Q). To assert that HTC is generating profit "because they manufacture the reference devices" is inaccurate given that the Nexus One was released in 2010 and no longer sold through first party sources such as Google Play (the devices available for purchase at the time of this writing are the Galaxy Nexus, the Nexus 7, and the Nexus Q).

There is, however, someone making a profit off of Android: Samsung. From the same article: "In stark contrast to HTC's weak earnings, Samsung said earlier Friday that it will likely post a record quarterly operating profit for the second quarter that ended June 30. The South Korean electronics giant, which is due to release audited results later this month, expects an operating profit of between 6.5 trillion won ($5.7 billion) and 6.9 trillion won for the quarter, compared with 3.75 trillion won a year earlier." (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230414120457751...)

TLDR: The assertion that Google and HTC are (significantly) profiting from Android is incorrect and instead should assert that Samsung is the only one making (significant) profits from Android.

Re: Intel says Clover Trail will not work with Linux

#30
post #18

Couple of ways to take this: 1) Microsoft has exerted leverage over Intel and got them to go down the preferred supplier route. Possible, and not overly surprising. 2) Intel is trying to carve a niche out and thinks its best bet is with the old hound. 3) The boring technical reason that there's loads of implementation and they can't be bothered making the changes to the Linux packages. It sounds like it'll run but wi…

Option 3 has no basis since Intel doesn't need to write a single line of code to get their new chip supported under Linux, they just need to release the specs. Which brings us to: 4) Just like many graphics chips, this processor does some black magic to boost performance and Intel doesn't want to give any clues to competitors by releasing specs and/or open drivers.

Intel don't own the design of the GPU, they can't release the specs.

This is a non-story, Atom versions following this one will be able to run Linux fine.

Post reply on HN