So what alternatives are to x86? A bit of OpenPOWER...

[PPB]

Why Microsoft decided to drop ARM on Surface and kill its own attempt to bring ARM to notebooks and desktops if x86 Windows tablets was not a success?

People has been saying "X86 and desktop is dead" for years now, im still waiting.

That is a non-sequitur. Microsoft dumping Windows RT doesnt mean x86 tablets are a success.

Microsoft dumped Windows RT because it was an unpolished turd that also happened to not allow anything but metro apps unless they were digitally signed. Instead of trying the android approach, letting the hang loose for devs to develop whatever they want (within reason), they went full Microsoft with their restrictive approach.

x86 tablets are a failure and 2-in-1 convertibles only succeed at overcoming 1 of the big problems behind x86 tablets (the incoherence in the preferred imput method in a tablet and the demographic target that still depends on x86: productivity users), the other ones are still present and materialize in the low adoption rate of x86 tablets compared to ARM ones.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

Shintai: Nothingness addressed most of what you said already, so I'll just address the virtualization part: QEMU is able to do this. The problem is that the ARM market is so fragmented; one must carefully research which CPU to use, as some simply do not have the necessary extensions.

Arachnotronic: Can't say I'm surprised... :/

 

[jhu]

Shintai: Nothingness addressed most of what you said already, so I'll just address the virtualization part: QEMU is able to do this. The problem is that the ARM market is so fragmented; one must carefully research which CPU to use, as some simply do not have the necessary extensions.

Running x86 on ARM via qemu is slow. I've done this on my phone (SOC=Snapdragon 801). Until desktop class ARM processors are made, this is not a viable option.

 

[Shivansps]

That is a non-sequitur. Microsoft dumping Windows RT doesnt mean x86 tablets are a success.

Microsoft dumped Windows RT because it was an unpolished turd that also happened to not allow anything but metro apps unless they were digitally signed. Instead of trying the android approach, letting the hang loose for devs to develop whatever they want (within reason), they went full Microsoft with their restrictive approach.

x86 tablets are a failure and 2-in-1 convertibles only succeed at overcoming 1 of the big problems behind x86 tablets (the incoherence in the preferred imput method in a tablet and the demographic target that still depends on x86: productivity users), the other ones are still present and materialize in the low adoption rate of x86 tablets compared to ARM ones.

x86 tablets are a failure? tell that to all the OEM that are still selling them and now upgrading to Cherry Trail, they did not seem to have figured that out yet.
2-in-1 is a different market, more like a evolution of netbook and ultrabook concepts than a Windows Tablet, and mostly 10.1" to 13".

And no Microsoft went RT because they wanted to extend beyond x86 and in doing that they realised that people uses Windows for the software ecosystem.

There was never a big restriction on Windows Store Apps, but they do want you to use Windows Store, that does not seem to be a big issue for Android and iOS.

The restriction for Windows Store Apps is in part technical because it runs on a diferent software ecosystem, the problem is that Windows APIs and .Net are not optimised for low power devices, so they created new ones focused on mobile, its not diferent from what Android and iOS do, actually im kinda suprised they did not created a cut down version of DX, just like OGL ES, althought there is a high chance that MS started working on DX12 at the same time they started working on Windows Store Apps and intended to be its graphic API.

 

[Shivansps]

Running x86 on ARM via qemu is slow. I've done this on my phone (SOC=Snapdragon 801). Until desktop class ARM processors are made, this is not a viable option.

I whould have expected that to be faster nowdays, last time ive attemped that it was on a Allwinner A10 running ARM Linux, and that was a Single Core A8.

 

[jhu]

I whould have expected that to be faster nowdays, last time ive attemped that it was on a Allwinner A10 running ARM Linux, and that was a Single Core A8.

It's certainly faster than a Cortex A8. It's still really slow.

 

[Exophase]

It's certainly faster than a Cortex A8. It's still really slow.

I use Cortex-A8 a lot and very much yes, it's a real dog. I'm glad ARM was quick to move on from that. It was like their Bonnell, but worse. A9 actually significantly improved IPC and lowered power consumption at the same frequency, on the same process (although I guess that's not totally bizarre as A72 later did the same)

Now having said that, a huge chunk of my code (the SIMD heavy part that plays nice with cache and branches) actually performs better on Cortex-A8 than Cortex-A9 when at the same clock speed.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

We have a while before ARM even gets within swearing distance of current x86 chips for raw power. And, frankly, I am somewhat sceptical as to whether it can do it and maintain such a huge perf/W advantage.

That said, in this day and age of tablets and virtualization and cloud computing and remote apps (think XenDesktop here...) it's not as much of a catastrophe as it might be. Doubly so because Intel seems to think we're about to hit a hard performance wall; people will HAVE to code more for efficiency and/or parallelism now.

I still say people (aside from Spider-bot here :sneaky who use Windows mostly use it because of apps, specifically Office, not for Windows itself. Microsoft may very well have dug its own grave with attempted vendor lock-in for the last 20+ years.

 

[TheELF]

We have a while before ARM even gets within swearing distance of current x86 chips for raw power.
...
...
...
Microsoft may very well have dug its own grave with attempted vendor lock-in for the last 20+ years.

Why should microsoft try to push windows on ARM if it has trouble running even on low tier x86 cores?It's not lock-in it's preventing brand decay by releasing a crappy running windows,yeah yeah I can already hear people screaming that windows runs like crap anyway,well that's the point isn't it,you need a decent level of performance to run windows pleasurably.

 

[Thala]

Microsoft dumped Windows RT because it was an unpolished turd that also happened to not allow anything but metro apps unless they were digitally signed.

Windows RT is a faithful compilation of Windows 8.1 for ARM. It is not less polished than its x86 siblings.
Of course the signature enforcement was Microsofts big mistake in this affair. And since it was their very own decision to force signature checks it could not possibly the reason for dumping it.

Microsoft could have been the pioneer when it comes to ARM on desktop. But instead, they rather took the Intel discount on Cherrytrail SoCs and pursued short term goals.

 

[Exophase]

I still say people (aside from Spider-bot here :sneaky who use Windows mostly use it because of apps, specifically Office, not for Windows itself. Microsoft may very well have dug its own grave with attempted vendor lock-in for the last 20+ years.

I used to think so too, but now I'm not so sure..

I tried sticking my tech-illiterate mother with a Linux machine once, back when they all still used traditional-style desktops. All of the programs she needed to do what little stuff she did were there but she still insisted on getting Windows back because it was more familiar.

Then again, maybe the updates to Windows alienate people like her too, although I have her on a Win 10 tablet right now and she's managing okay.

 

[zir_blazer]

I used to think so too, but now I'm not so sure..

I tried sticking my tech-illiterate mother with a Linux machine once, back when they all still used traditional-style desktops. All of the programs she needed to do what little stuff she did were there but she still insisted on getting Windows back because it was more familiar.

Then again, maybe the updates to Windows alienate people like her too, although I have her on a Win 10 tablet right now and she's managing okay.

This is the same that Windows XP to Windows Vista, or 7 to 8. They are used to the UI of a specific Windows version, not all of them.

 

[Exophase]

This is the same that Windows XP to Windows Vista, or 7 to 8. They are used to the UI of a specific Windows version, not all of them.

I thought so too, but that's not really what I'm seeing here.

Maybe another part of it is they just feel safer using what most other people are using.

 

[Thala]

Why should microsoft try to push windows on ARM if it has trouble running even on low tier x86 cores?It's not lock-in it's preventing brand decay by releasing a crappy running windows,yeah yeah I can already hear people screaming that windows runs like crap anyway,well that's the point isn't it,you need a decent level of performance to run windows pleasurably

I assume you never used a Surface 2, which is powered by a rather slow ARM (Cortex A15) by todays standards. Thing is, it runs Windows like a charm. You never have to wait even under multi-tasking scenarios...always fluid including the few desktop apps available.

See for yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA-jn5lBLxY

It is always surprising to me how well this thing is running Windows given the relatively slow CPU. With respect to interaction with the OS and fluidity of UI, there is no difference to a Surface Pro 3 (8Gyte, i5), which i also own.

 

[Headfoot]

People use Windows and OS X because they dont ever have to resort to the command line when something goes wrong, among all the other reasons above too

 

[cbn]

ARM will end up taking the desktop unless Intel reacts.

MS already killed ARM's chance at mainstream desktop usage, by crippling Windows RT.

There is always some kind of Google OS (<----not exactly my cup of tea, but it needs to be considered).

And SteamOS also has an ARM port (currently used in the Steam Link), so the day may come when Linux Mint may have various gaming clients (Steam, GOG, etc) if ARM's System Based Server architecture matures and also makes it's way to the desktop (which I imagine it should since standardization is what allows us to acquire OS and hardware separately)

However, with this mentioned it really depends on what kind of performance to price ratio ARM can muster.

Example: If performance to price ratio is good enough a company like Valve may decide to port their games to ARM. (Valve games in x86 Linux don't require that much CPU in my experience...so I don't think absolute performance would be a problem for a future ARM CPU)

 

[DrMrLordX]

What an excellent post. +1

Thanks

There are devices shipped with Windows 10 that don't let you disable secure boot, though (so you're stuck with Windows 10)

You don't need to disable secure boot to run Linux, though. Ubuntu and its variants can and do support it, as do some other Linux distros. I installed Lubuntu on my 7700k with secure boot enabled, and it was fine.

And there are are or at least were mainstream commercial ARM devices that let you install other OSes without having to hack or circumvent anything. First thing I did with my Samsung Chromebook was put an Ubuntu variant on it instead of Chrome OS, I literally didn't boot into its preloaded OS once.

That is a good point . . .the Chromebooks are outliers here. As you stated, there are some functions that aren't "there" yet under teh Lun1x . . .

Just to play devil's advocate, what if ARM ends up being cheaper, faster, and uses much less energy?

Well, if you compare some of Apple's designs to, say, some of AMD's designs, maybe it's already cheaper; faster; and uses much less energy (Zen nothwithstanding).

It'll likely end up everywhere (including desktops and laptops). Microsoft's business model has changed, they're now all about making money off Azure cloud hosting, Office 365, and advertising dollars generated by Bing and Windows 10. The days of the "WINTEL" partnership could easily go away as the business model has really changed.

All I'm really gonna add here is that people are now prepared to move away from the MS software ecosystem. They did it in mobile, so if you gave them more Android/iOS on the desktop, they might not mind so much. But in the end, that's just going to erode the entire desktop paradigm, to the point that "desktop" means getting a big tablet and pairing it with bluetooth keyboard/mouse or whatever.

Apple as well could switch gears and move to a custom cyclone ARM processor (they've switched microarchitectures once already) to become even more vertically integrated but I envision them pushing iOS on desktop once they have enough apps, and slowly phase out OS X. At least this would be much easier than another Rosetta scenario.

They could, and with A10x and beyond, it's worth watching to see if they go that way. For now, Intel is giving them what they want on the desktop/workstation side of things. Apple certainly has the resources to make the transition on the software/OS side. Not every firm can boast that. I just don't see myself wanting to buy into the Apple ecosystem just so I can get an ARM-based Mac.

Anyways, I agree with you in principle but we're a small minority here (hobbyists) and the days of DIY PC's (ATX is so antiquated it's not even funny) could be over pretty fast.

Oh I agree, I'm just saying, it may not be very good for us if/when that happens.

The only way ARM's advent helps us is if we dump the desktop hobby or if somebody - not Apple - steps up and starts producing desktop-worthy ARM hardware, presumably running Linux. It would take (in no specific order):

1). Getting Valve to port over the Linux steam client (0 titles would work initially) to jump-start development of desktop ARM titles already exists!
2). Porting amdgpu or similar over to ARM Linux to get AMD GPUs to work out-of-the-box
3). Porting a whole bunch of other drivers to make networking, perhipherals, and other stuff work out-of-the-box (bonus; since people would be switching away from x86/ATX Wintel machines, the effort could focus on a smaller subset of hardware intended to work on the ARM machines, similar to what Apple does with OSX)
4). Figuring out exactly which vanilla ARM design would be good for the desktop, and then paying a fab like TSMC or GF to produce a market-worthy number of chips
5). Contracting with a OEM to handle board design, blah blah blah hardware
6). Getting some cheap/deprecated AMD GPUs based on GCN 1.2 at least to start
7). Approaching Khronos group and saying, "hey, can we have Vulkan on this thing?" and convincing them to make it happen

And Bob's your uncle. It still wouldn't run your extensive library of x86 DirectX video games, but it would be a start. It would take tens of millions of dollars even using bog standard ARM designs. It might take more, depending on how much of a pita it would be to get all that software work done. Maybe the open source crowd could be suckered encouraged to pick up the ball and run with some of the Linux side of things, just to get hardware up and running. Though I dunno, a lot of base hardware drivers are in the kernel itself, so if the kernel is running fine on ARM, then maybe driver porting wouldn't be as big an issue as I imagine . . . still, a lot of testing/validation would be required.

And then, on top of that, you'd have to find a market for the new widgets to justify the expenditure. You can get Android apps to run on Linux - there's software for that - so selling it as a desktop/mobile crossover device to complement your mobile stuff could work, assuming Google doesn't nuke you or close down Android/Google Play store apps hard enough (somehow) to ruin your entire business model. But no Apple ain't gonna let you run iOS stuff, even in a VM. They'll put a stop to that.

And SteamOS also has an ARM port (currently used in the Steam Link), so the day may come when Linux Mint may have various gaming clients (Steam, GOG, etc) if ARM's System Based Server architecture matures and also makes it's way to the desktop (which I imagine it should since standardization is what allows us to acquire OS and hardware separately)

I don't think we specifically need to wait for any of the server-oriented ARM efforts to have ARM hardware that could work okay as a desktop computer. Apple's already demonstrated that their in-house designs could probably do it, if not now, then very soon. Most of the server-oriented stuff is shaping up like the Cavium ThunderX or *gasp* Seattle, with low clockspeeds and tons of cores. Apple's approach seems to be the better one for a prospective desktop. Whether or not off-the-shelf stuff will catch up anytime soon to stuff like A9/A9x/A10x is uncertain.

 

[Shivansps]

What is the Samsung Chromebook that allows you to install anything?

I assume you never used a Surface 2, which is powered by a rather slow ARM (Cortex A15) by todays standards. Thing is, it runs Windows like a charm. You never have to wait even under multi-tasking scenarios...always fluid including the few desktop apps available.

See for yourself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA-jn5lBLxY

It is always surprising to me how well this thing is running Windows given the relatively slow CPU. With respect to interaction with the OS and fluidity of UI, there is no difference to a Surface Pro 3 (8Gyte, i5), which i also own.

Thats because Windows Store Apps is a diferent software ecosystem with mobile in mind, its not the same crap you will run on desktop, well, actually it is now since every Windows Store App that you will on a Windows 8.1/10 is coded in the same way.

 

[Exophase]

You don't need to disable secure boot to run Linux, though. Ubuntu and its variants can and do support it, as do some other Linux distros.

I'm not sure about the specifics, but I was under the impression that you at least needed to use an MS signed bootloader. From what I can find that does include some that can boot Ubuntu, but it'd at least impose some limits into exactly what you can boot.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I'm not sure about the specifics, but I was under the impression that you at least needed to use an MS signed bootloader. From what I can find that does include some that can boot Ubuntu, but it'd at least impose some limits into exactly what you can boot.

You do need a signed bootloader, and several of the bigger Linux distros can supply them. But yeah lots of the distros can't . . . er well not yet anyway.

By the way, bringing it all back to the main topic: ARM isn't the only player in town that could take over the desktop, though it appears to be the logical choice.

An OpenPOWER system could be used just as well. That being said, one would have to wonder WHY you'd go that route, since the software ecosystems that're taking over people's lives mostly runs on ARM hardware.

 

[cbn]

And SteamOS also has an ARM port (currently used in the Steam Link), so the day may come when Linux Mint may have various gaming clients (Steam, GOG, etc) if ARM's System Based Server architecture matures and also makes it's way to the desktop (which I imagine it should since standardization is what allows us to acquire OS and hardware separately)

I don't think we specifically need to wait for any of the server-oriented ARM efforts to have ARM hardware that could work okay as a desktop computer. Apple's already demonstrated that their in-house designs could probably do it, if not now, then very soon. Most of the server-oriented stuff is shaping up like the Cavium ThunderX or *gasp* Seattle, with low clockspeeds and tons of cores. Apple's approach seems to be the better one for a prospective desktop. Whether or not off-the-shelf stuff will catch up anytime soon to stuff like A9/A9x/A10x is uncertain.

What I expect they would do is adopt the standardization aspect of the platform (in the same way that x86 servers method of booting is the same as an x86 laptop and desktop) and then adopt this to a lesser prcoessor design (probably an ARM laptop APU or ARM SMB NAS processor).

So maybe four to eight Vanilla ARM cores either coupled to an iGPU or dGPU.

This unless there is something about SBSA that doesn't lend itself to being used with a lower platform.

P.S. Here was a letter from Jon Masters (chief ARM architect from Red Hat about ARM Server standardization in 2016):

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=37964458&highlight=jon+masters#post37964458

(So decoupling of hardware and OS so the two can be mixed and matched anyway the user desires)

 

[jhu]

What is the Samsung Chromebook that allows you to install anything?

This thing. There's even a FreeBSD port to it

 

[Exophase]

You do need a signed bootloader, and several of the bigger Linux distros can supply them. But yeah lots of the distros can't . . . er well not yet anyway.

Thanks, it's good to know. I think people were paranoid because MS could have refused to sign any third party bootloaders, and honestly I'm a little surprised that they aren't.

By the way, bringing it all back to the main topic: ARM isn't the only player in town that could take over the desktop, though it appears to be the logical choice.

An OpenPOWER system could be used just as well. That being said, one would have to wonder WHY you'd go that route, since the software ecosystems that're taking over people's lives mostly runs on ARM hardware.

Unless you want to run Android or iOS on a desktop I don't really see much relevance in any ARM ecosystems. And there aren't people who actually want to run Android or iOS on desktops, are there?

To really be viable it'd have to be in a similar performance class as the usual x86 desktop processors, and POWER8 can claim that while no realistically available ARM CPU really can yet.. I think we're really going to need to see processors made with such targets in mind, or at least a lot higher targets than phones.

 

[Exophase]

This thing. There's even a FreeBSD port to it

Did you mean this one? The one you linked is the x86 version.

The one I was referring to was actually the original one.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

People use Windows and OS X because they dont ever have to resort to the command line when something goes wrong, among all the other reasons above too

Yeah right.... As is you don't have to use Single User Mode or Terminal when a Mac gets scrambled.....

We've officially sunk to a new low on this forum..........Clearly not aware that Linux and Mac OSX are descended from the exact same thing -- but licensed differently (FreeBSD).