From: Kurt H Maier <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [9front] build iso from arm64 Date: Sat, 7 May 2022 11:49:18 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <Yna/Lp5ZCVPbPA9N@wopr> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAG3JMtadAge5B04e5r2-tqO5edV7EE0sTzLEzhSeH2cyTXemail@example.com> On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 11:14:37AM -0400, Thaddeus Woskowiak wrote: > Who is going to IBM the Arm platform? Microsoft? Amazon? Google? > Facebook? Google could easily drive the entire ARM SoC market themselves, without question, just by making requirements in Android. In fact the ARM/Google relationship would nicely parallel the Intel/Microsoft reign of terror. > The PC platform is an agreement between manufacturers to use a > standard boot firmware (bios/uefi), standard hardware interfaces (e.g. > pci, ata, vesa, etc, ac97/hda), and booting procedures (mbr/gpt). No, it's not an agreement between manufacturers. Every one of the standards you mentioned came from Intel except for ATA. If you want an Intel chip in your computer, you play ball. Fortunately it's easy to play ball, because once you sign the NDAs Intel will happily do half the work for you. > The closest we have had is the Microsoft Windows RT Surface The closest we've had with a chance at being a competitor is the Google Chromebook specifications, but it's severely limiting in what hardware it allows, which leads back to a free-for-all once you step outside the spec. Another could-have-been was the OLPC XO-4 ARM machines, which shipped with a beautiful OpenFirmware build that supported all the hardware natively, no ACPI required. > Though, for anything to succeed, it would need the weight of an IBM > behind it. No, I think ARM could step up and offer meaningful reference designs, and that's about all it would take. But the world is committed to a bespoke u-boot and device-tree per SKU, and most of the development industry have Stockholmed themselves into believing this is for the best. khm
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-07 18:51 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2022-05-06 3:47 william 2022-05-06 15:34 ` ori 2022-05-07 3:31 ` william 2022-05-07 3:45 ` ori 2022-05-07 4:03 ` ori 2022-05-07 4:36 ` mkf9 2022-05-07 4:45 ` Kurt H Maier 2022-05-07 5:29 ` william 2022-05-07 13:51 ` Stanley Lieber 2022-05-07 15:14 ` Thaddeus Woskowiak 2022-05-07 18:49 ` Kurt H Maier [this message]
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=Yna/Lp5ZCVPbPA9N@wopr \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [9front] build iso from arm64' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).