Products > Computers

(expensive, but) mnt pocket-reform (arm 7" mini-laptop)

<< < (10/10)

SiliconWizard:

--- Quote from: DiTBho on May 26, 2023, 06:50:59 am ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on May 26, 2023, 12:37:49 am ---These days, unless you're writing an OS, the ISA doesn't matter much as far as porting software goes.

--- End quote ---

don't forget "my-c". Currently, it only targets MIPS5++ :D

--- End quote ---

Yes of course, if you're maintaining your own language and developing very low-level stuff, then surely it matters.

Anyway, x86 will die, eventually.
As I said in another thread, what has made Intel will eventually kill it. That's the rule.
Not saying it's gonna happen tomorrow, but it will happen.
And the market will do all it can to prevent Intel from transitioning to something else. Again, that's the rule.
So, curious to see how it will all unfold.

james_s:

--- Quote from: brucehoult on May 26, 2023, 12:16:22 am ---I totally agree. And yet you insist that architecture should be x86.

--- End quote ---

I don't actually. I have a handful of ARM based platforms I actively use and they work just fine because they support the software I want to run on them, my employer issued laptop is M1 based and again it works fine for me because it runs all the software I need to do my job. Nowhere have I insisted that everything should be x86, I have only pointed out why x86 is and will likely remain dominant in many markets for a long time and I defend it against ridiculous claims of it being worthless garbage because obviously it works just fine. I personally have a need for at least SOME x86 machines because I want compatibility with the software, however if somebody builds a machine with some totally different CPU architecture that can seamlessly run x86 software via a compatibility layer I'm totally fine with that too, because ultimately it's the software compatibility I care about, along with low cost and reasonable performance. How it works under the hood makes no difference to me, if you can make a 6502, Z80 , Sparc, ARM, whatever run my software acceptably well then great.

james_s:

--- Quote from: brucehoult on May 26, 2023, 12:16:22 am ---That's weird. Just a few hours ago I was reading messages where you took the exact opposite point of view, that the number of professionals using such tools (or in that case IIRC it was about assembly language and debuggers) is so small that they are irrelevant and they can use whatever they want but it doesn't affect the real computer market.

I don't think you are arguing honestly, but just a troll.

Also, point of order, your honour:

"Photoshop now supports M1 but until Apple switched it required x86."

Photoshop has been around for 36 years and I was using it myself in the 1980s.  It was running on x86 Macs for only 15 of those years.

In fact less, as CS3 with Intel Mac compatibility was released only in April 2007, 15 months after the first mass-production Intel Macs, and almost two years after the Apple Developer Transition Kit (with a Pentium 4) was made available to all registered developers in June 2005 (Adobe probably could get them quite a bit earlier).

Prior to x86, Photoshop of course for the first seven years ran only on the M68k, and then for a dozen years on PowerPC. It was ported to PowerPC (Mac) and x86 (Windows) at around the same time in 1993-1994.

Adobe got Photoshop for Arm Macs out in March 2021, only four months after the first machines went on sale -- a much better effort from them.

--- End quote ---

No I'm not just trolling.

I forgot about Photoshop on 68k, ironically I have a whole stack of 68k Macs and have used Photoshop on them, however they are ancient, and I suppose I could have said versions of Photoshop made in the last ~20 years which is what absolutely everyone using Photoshop professionally is going to be using, required x86, and even now it will not run on any random platform, it requires either Windows x86, or Mac x86 or M1, there are no other choices that I'm aware of. M68k is pretty much irrelevant since no remotely current supported version works on that.

I also don't see what is opposite about my other statement. The number of people writing BIOS, debuggers or other very low level stuff is extremely small and is irrelevant compared to the number of people using software in professional environments. I've worked in the software industry for close to 25 years now and the VAST majority of productivity software I have ever touched in a professional capacity required either Windows or Mac.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page