Slashdot Mirror
Will Vanderpool Make Linux More Popular?
Digitaldonkey writes "New Scientist is reporting that Intel's forthcoming multi-core processor architecture, codenamed "Vanderpool", could undermine Microsoft's dominance by letting other operating systems run simultaneously more easily. From the article: 'The chip will allow future machines to run, say, Windows XP together with Linux or the Apple operating system as easily as today's Windows computers run Word and Internet Explorer simultaneously.'"
Sounds great, but "..Windows XP together with Linux or the Apple operating system" -- I didn't know that Apple would be releasing MacOS for other architectures. And I'm assuming it's not going to incorporate the PPC archtype.
So we're looking at a chip that may be a reality in 2008-2009, but since New Scientist doesn't provide any hard info on the chip except for the funky code name, this is all very up in the air. Virtualisation software works pretty good today anyway. You can easily try out any flavour of Linux or BSD on your WinXP computer (or vice cersa) using VMWare today -- without having to "give up" Windows (or Linux).
So the chips will multitask by themselves? Would this not be like integrating vmware into the chip somehow? (Hardcoding some "master OS" into the chip, and not giving the real OS full control.) Would this not also allow for DRM/etc to be tightly integrated, as the OS doesn't control the computer anymore?
It may make Windows more popular, too. I've come across a bunch of people who want to play Windows-only games, but don't want to go through the hassle of going into Windows whenever they want to play something. If all you had to do was instantly switch over, it wouldn't be a big deal and I'm sure a lot more people would do it.
Anyways, the only way I can see the ability to run Windows and Linux simultaneously actually making Linux significantly more popular is in the workplace where the admins want to switch everybody over to Linux, but there's that one critical app that only runs on Windows...
-- Dr. Eldarion --
One more to add to the list:
1) hidden 64bit abilities
2) 5-7 ghz processor
3) multicore cpu
All this to make people delay their purchase of an athlon64?
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
but if MS gets a hold of the bios like a recent article has stated they are trying to do, MS can lock out any OS they want with their "trustworthy computing" initiative. We all know that "trustworthy computing" is a metaphor for complete and utter lockdown by MS so your machine will only run Windows in the way MS says.
Let's hope that Intel can buck the MS trend and do something like this.
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
This could really cut out the relevance of application support behind an OS. Any application not supported by your current OS could be built in with the app and booted separately almost like a Knoppix CD.
Thinking particularly of games and multimedia, this could really shake things up.
-t
http://unmoldable.com W:"No one of consequence" I:"I must know" W:"Get used to disappointment"
this may be the reason for earlier story about MS wanting to control the BIOS too. So now the competition is between MS and Intel. This looks an interesting fight as both are titans and closely interdependent. Having killed other CPUs by promising a lot and delivering little, MS has put itself in a tight position. It can't fight with intel in the same way it fought with Digital. This is one of the reasons, why MS won't release 64 bit OS until intel gives go ahead (according to some newsgroup articles, people had seen 64-bit windows demo in 1997).
If bios is under MS control, and if MS OS is pre-installed, what are the chances that it will allow people to install other OS? Today, most pre-installed XP machine create single partition covering the entier the disk (many people think this is dangerous specially if the partition goes bad, you could loose all data). This effectively prevents installing linux atleast to non-hackers.
Still you can't discount Intel. Although MS can cotrol many PC manufacturers, most MB manufacturers will side with Intel and leave BIOS out of MS reach to be monopolized.
MS can play some dirty tricks too. If MS-OS detects that you are running some other OS too, then it can create some random fault in MS-OS and crash it which may give user the feeling that the other OS caused it. Anyone old enough to remember DR-DOS being incompatible with Windows warning?
Intel processors have supported the TSS (Task State Segment) for years. This is an architectural feature that enables true task switching in the processor. No OS or other software I'm aware of has ever used this feature of the architecture. The stated reason why it's not used in Windows is "performance". I can see why that would have been a concern 4 or 5 years ago, but it's not very well quantified. I have no idea at all if Linux makes use of the TSS in a way that differs from Windows.
Although I'm sure you're just making a joke, I haven't seen many programs work together better than Word and IE. Word can run inside IE if you need a little text editing box on a page. IE can run inside word for HTML editing. Copying and pasting things from IE to Word keeps all formatting and tables and everything.
I wish all applications worked together as flawlessly as those two do.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
Perhaps we are going to be able to go back to multi-user computers. This would actually be a real benefit for many people. An AS/400 for the home, replacing all the boxes with a single central box again. Thin clients with wireless networking around the place. If a virus hits OS Instance 1, bring it down and fix it in the background while work is transferred to OS Instance 2. One user can crash and burn without anyone else knowing or caring. Load sharing means that the heavy and light users can peacefully coexist. And small businesses are going to love it. Life was easier in the 80s when they had a single Unix box and half a dozen dumb terminals. Life is going to be easier again when there's a single big reliable box with all the external connections and massive storage, and a few screens and keyboards around the place. No fun for case modders, but then for those of us who believe computing should be as ubiquitous as plumbing, and as unobtrusive, case modding is deeply sad.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
I see a hell of a lot more use running SMP Linux on this and taking advantage of the multiple processing units running my Linux apps. The uber-OS could be used to guarantee that the underlying OS stayed uncompromised, thus making Linux yet another order of magnitude more secure than Windows!
I actually had this on my original ($5,000!) IBM PC back in high school. We had Apple ][s at school, but my dad wanted an IBM because it was "business-oriented." So we bought the QuadLink from QuadRam (can't find it on google or ebay, so they must have gone out of business and nobody wants them any more).
This card, which was an octopus -- it connected to almost everything in the PC -- could switch to Apple mode with Ctrl+Alt+A, and back to IBM with Ctrl+Alt+I. It could play all the Apple games that we played at school, and I also used it to do my homework.
It didn't run things concurrently, though -- switching modes put the other mode "on hold" until you came back to it.
Ah, memories...
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
You're kidding, right? Or maybe you don't deal with Word and IE as much as I do...anyway, what you describe is, like many of Office's features, really nifty until it breaks. Once it breaks it's nearly impossible to fix. Recently I've had to deal with numerous systems suddenly unable to open links to Word documents inside of Internet Explorer. What changed? Don't know; I'm not the only guy who works here (there's about 300 others). What's the fix? Wipe the hard drive and reload? Seems rather drastic. Reload Word? It's part of Office, and reloading it has no effect. Reload IE? Can't. It's part of the OS.
I've got no real gripe against adding features to the OS, but if you do so, it must be impossible for users to modify those features.
Nuff said.
Maybe the design of the chip will be such that it will be able to offer virtual PowerPCs as well as virtual Pentiums. There's really no information in the article, so there's no way to say what the chip might do and how.
The real reason is certain Distros that frighten users! Text based install? The software of 2001? Kernel 2.2? Politcal flamewars? Grandma's going to scream!
However, some distros actually work. Mandrake 9.2 is practically grandma proof, and the upcoming SuSE 9.0 looks like it will be Joeproof as well! How ever, as long as zealots keeping whoring Distros like Debian, there is going to be FUD spread by trolls for fun and profit!.
Even gentoo is easier to use, I would reccomend it to users with around 1 year of linux experience who want power and bleeding edge. So Debian users, please convince the developers to
If that happens, the zealots can have their cake while joe can eat to! But a debian zealot will probably mod this down.
The chip will allow future machines to run, say, Windows XP together with Linux or the Apple operating system as easily as today's Windows computers run Word and Internet Explorer simultaneously.
Nevermind the fact that to pull off such a claim, you would need to duplicate or time-share every other resource in the system, such as video card, sound card, hard disk, motherboard chipset, yadda yadda yadda. It's just so much easier to wave your hands, get people excited, and claim that this new chip can single-handedly cure cancer and leap tall buildings in a single bound...
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.