PureBasic Forums - English

Seymour - awesome post. I am always impressed by the articulation ability of our friends in UK!

The other direction of development I am seeing is that of software apps running on top of the cloud. In this case the cloud is treated as an OS with APIs and applications are built on top of it. For example there are storage and hot backup programs that run on top of Amazon's Cloud.

However the market is too immature to get into I think.

I dont know if that whole cloud thing will last that long. I mean it's nothing new. Computing started that way. Remember the mainframes and terminals? It's more cost efficient to put the calculation load to the clients, instead of run many servers with high performance.

Windows 8 x86 tablets: http://microsoft-news.com/intel-our-win ... be-better/
'She did not see much future for ARM-based tablets.

"For the client," she said, "compatibility and legacy, we think, is a very important value proposition, certainly in the enterprise for IT managers, and also for consumers for probably a significant number of years into the future."

Given what she describes is broadly accurate, and Windows 8 tablets will offer the best of both worlds, I myself would much rather buy an Intel x86 than ARM tablet.'


This makes sense. If x86 Windows 8 based tablets are competitive with the other tablet platforms in terms of features, usability, price, battery life, etc. then the ability to also support the massive amount of legacy Windows software out there would be a huge advantage that Microsoft/Intel can leverage.

This would be good for us of course as our PB Windows apps will then run seamlessly on the new hardware. Hopefully the wait for Windows 8 x86 tablets isn't a long one ...

Thoughts?

would be good all round if the intel chips are price competitive and have equal power performance (battery life) as Arm
though I don't think Arm is going to go away and Microsoft is counting on it too, supporting at least 4 Arm processors
with windows 8, though Qualcomm is or has developed a quad core 2.5 ghz arm chip, which will be appearing in
Netbooks and tablets very soon.

.....and that is going to be a snag for us, Win8 on Arm, or Win8 Metro on x86, two soon-to-arrive changes in Windows8. It's good that all our current work will be supported in Win8, but the proviso is that the hardware has not moved over to Arm - However, from a marketing point of view, introducing Arm (especially the Quad Core) with it's energy efficiency et al, is a very attractive proposition for the PC Manufactures as they desperately need the consumer market to ditch their old machines and buy new ones. If consumers take the bait, it will also be because they like the idea of Metro (iPad/iPhone ish interface). So, we could find ourselves on a supported platform that nobody uses........ Perhaps it's time to entice Fantaisie into taking a very serious look at both Arm and Metro.

IdeasVacuum wrote:.....and that is going to be a snag for us, Win8 on Arm, or Win8 Metro on x86, two soon-to-arrive changes in Windows8. It's good that all our current work will be supported in Win8, but the proviso is that the hardware has not moved over to Arm - However, from a marketing point of view, introducing Arm (especially the Quad Core) with it's energy efficiency et al, is a very attractive proposition for the PC Manufactures as they desperately need the consumer market to ditch their old machines and buy new ones. If consumers take the bait, it will also be because they like the idea of Metro (iPad/iPhone ish interface). So, we could find ourselves on a supported platform that nobody uses........ Perhaps it's time to entice Fantaisie into taking a very serious look at both Arm and Metro.

We can probably wait until we see what Wintel is able to do with Win8 x86 on tablets. The ability to run legacy x86 applications on a power efficient tablet will be very enticing IMHO.
Plus, the new ultrathin laptops are coming out soon and might shake things up a bit.

Personally I hope to see a future in which these problems go away or are seriously mitigated. With stuff like multi-core CPU's etc becoming the norm, the work towards CPU/GPU architectures...

Why not multi-platform chips? Something akin to the old SX/DX line (remember when Math co-processors were separate chips? lol), except all on one chip. At the least, able to dual boot different OS/Platforms, or maybe even Multi-Boot them in real time and switch between the OS/Application you need to use, with the ability to share information between them.


lol OK OK... Big Pipe Dream, but.. Still, the idea of a CPU with different cores supporting different architectures, and able to virtualize those systems and run native apps. That is very appealing to me, from a purely geek perspective.

That's a great idea to have multi cores with different architecture processors in each of the cores!

Zach wrote: Why not multi-platform chips?

Because chip designer have a so called "silicon budget". That means they have a limited amount of silicon to put in the stuff they need and want to. By having 2 architectures at once your roughly cutting the silicon budget by half without improving performance or adding a vital feature.

Actualy ARM does have different instruction sets in one architecture. They have the ARM instuction set for best performance, the Thumb instruction set for best code density and the Jazelle extension that executes Java bytecode directly on the CPU.

Jazelle extension that executes Java bytecode directly on the CPU.

I didn't know that but do these different instructions sets coexist on a single chip?
Perhaps that's what the rational for Android, which I had surmised was just a hasty response
to apples ios, like how to make a mobile OS in a hurry. Linux + JVM problem solved.
Though if your java is run natively it makes a lot of sense.

idle wrote:

Jazelle extension that executes Java bytecode directly on the CPU.

I didn't know that but do these different instructions sets coexist on a single chip?
Perhaps that's what the rational for Android, which I had surmised was just a hasty response
to apples ios, like how to make a mobile OS in a hurry. Linux + JVM problem solved.
Though if your java is run natively it makes a lot of sense.

Yes, they do. You can switch instruction sets as you want, theoreticly one program can use all instruction sets. Not all instruction sets need to be present on all ARM implementations. It's not like a instruction set extension, you do need to switch the CPU state to execute another instruction set.

Even with the silicon budget, I still think it would be a cool idea worth pursuing. We would never know what the possibilities are until we attempted it anyway, right? Like all things it could show enough promise that it leads to advances that make it possible to house such architectures on a single wafer. Or perhaps leads to an entirely new Hybrid Architecture...

But then, I still wonder about the possibility of a multi-cpu board supporting different architectures... If not calling for an outright new architecture itself to keep all components talking in harmony...

Either way, won't know until we try is the way I look at things.

Zach wrote:Even with the silicon budget, I still think it would be a cool idea worth pursuing. We would never know what the possibilities are until we attempted it anyway, right?

Actualy we do know exactly the possiblities. It would enable you to execute code that is compiled for the build in architectures. Thats it.
In most cases this ability is not very usefull. On low power consumption devices you dont want to use power consuming architectures and on devices that dont need to care much about power you dont want to use a slower less power consuming architecture. It's not that one architecture can do anything another cant do.

Zach wrote:Still, the idea of a CPU with different cores supporting different architectures, and able to virtualize those systems and run native apps. That is very appealing to me, from a purely geek perspective.

You do realize that the new ARM chips besides being multicore have virtualization built into them, just as most X64 & X86 chips have had for several years.

There's also a thing called emulation. In some CPU designs instructions are replaced with, or executed as 'microcode'. If the CPU is fast or flexible enough it would be able to handle multiple instruction sets. Think of PS2 on PS3, or Mame on a PC.

As for the speed loss, yeah, there would be some, but with some limited hardware support, and the increasing power of those low power CPU's there's still a lot that can be done.

(Your average bloody smartphone has more memory and CPU power than an old Commodore Amiga!)