Slashdot Mirror
Ubuntu Ports To ARM
nerdyH writes "Canonical will port Ubuntu Desktop Linux to the ARMv7 architecture. The announcement sets the stage for Intel to lose the traditional 'software advantage' that has enabled x86 to shrug off attacks from other architectures for the last 30 years. How long can it be before Microsoft responds with a Windows 7 port? I mean, x86 just can't do 'idle power' like ARM ... Nokia's N810 tablets can standby for several weeks, just like a cell phone, keeping you 'present' on IM, behind IPv4 NAT the whole time. The first Atom MIDs are standing by for 6-7 hours."
there are flash plugins for ARM, mind :)
If anything, this is pretty cool for the Pandora project.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
You have a point. However many companies (VIA, AMD) are developing a chip like Intel's atom. As these chips are to be put into lower cost computers (MID sub notebooks, netbooks) there is an advantage (in terms of cost) to linux in being able to run on other platforms other than x86.
If for instance I produced a POS till system based on Linux it would be advantageous if I could run this on an ARM processor.
As Linux can run on many different platforms it also frees device manufactures to think differently about what computers can be in the future, and how they will be used in society (later versions of the OLPC set for 2010 are ebooks for example).
What features does ARM lack for it to be a desktop or laptop processor? Iyonix make the RiscPC, which is a very capable desktop machines built around an ARM processor. While I don't own a RiscPC myself, I do own a two DEC Sharks that have an ARM processor, and compared to the contemporary x86 PC of the same era (1998-1999), the Shark was more powerful (233MHz, which is roughly equivalent to a 466MHz x86 processor). There is nothing in the ARM instruction set that makes it unsuitable for a desktop computer, and for a laptop it is far more suitable than an x86 chip thanks to greater efficiency. Even the Thumb instruction set (which reduces most instructions to 16bits), can be exploited by the kind of operating system that can run on a desktop machine despite being aimed primarily at small devices where code density and cheap (8bit) memory is advantageous. Frankly, it sounds to me like you simply don't know what you're talking about.
I never bought into the hype for all these years that we'd give up desktops and do most of our computing on mobile devices. The screens were too small, they all had unique software, didn't operate with another, and couldn't perform the tasks I need.
However I can take a Nokia i810 tablet, install KDE 4 and have a modern, fully function OS on it that can do anything my desktop can do, and interoperate with my desktop.
Seriously, now we're talking. Give me a slightly better tablet with 1 gig of memory and then I'm not sure I'd look at a laptop again.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
> Ubuntu alone is not going to "set the stage for Intel to lose the "software advantage"",
> or anyone else for that matter, by switching to ARM.
You are missing the big picture. Go look at lilliputing.com's similar story. This is about netbooks. If Canonical is investing in a full port this tells us somebody bigger than the generic Chinese outfit we already know about is planning to introduce an ARM based netbook, which also is isn't news to we who have been paying attention because ARM themselves said as much weeks ago. We still don't know WHO this mystery major vendor is though.
> Sure, a few thousand people will be able to switch to an ARM device without blinking, but
> the rest of the 99.9% of the worlds computer users won't give a flying piece of monkey poo.
Have you used an EEEPC running their customized Xandros? It 'just works' and in the last month they have added a full repository where you can just click to add from a quickly growing list of additional apps. I haven't seen Ubuntu Netbook Remix yet but I'm confident that if they put their minds to it thay can produce a similarly seamless experience on a preloaded machine. And the end user won't even realize the machine isn't x86 compatible and won't care as long as it 'just works.'
The big change will be these new ARM netbooks won't have an option for XP. Some might get roughed up enough by Redmond to offer a WinCE option but who in their right mind would pick Pocket IE and Office viewers over a full Firefox and full version of OO.o?
Democrat delenda est
Intel has whored the x86 line almost to death. Microsoft, for it's part, has whored the Windows line to death - eg: Vista. The market has simply been 'fleshed-out.' There are new verticals to explore. The PC market has been played to death and that horse will continue to take a beating over the conceivable future; although, people are no longer fascinated by PCs or are no longer going to be woo'd by MS and Intel simply because they released a new OS/MB combination.
No one can doubt the success of Windows XP. IMHO, it was too successful. People have found a system that meets or exceeds their expectations/needs. We nerds can wax philosophic all we want, the market's trend is going another direction. Small appliances with enough power to complete the jobs people need completed will be performed by footprints that are smaller and smaller - both in terms of power consumption (THINK GREEN!!) and physical dimensions.
Maybe MS/Intel arn't worried - they should be. The next time you see a police car take a good look at all the digital equipment running inside that squad car. There are no less than 2 cameras in the cars now - 1 dash cam and 1 rear view mirror cam. Some cameras are actually built into the flashlights they use to blind you with as they approach your vehicle to site you. What kind of computers do you think are running that equipment? Let me tell you from experience: Whatever gets the job done! If they can get a free OS to perform it's job that is much more attractive to the designer/builder than the MS tax.
There are many markets yet to explore. Some young, financially-poor, hungry engineer is now currently exploring markets unbeknown to us. He's the guy hoping the giants stay asleep. The people who build his equipment also hope the giants stay asleep. As soon as someone's idea takes off, there will be many off-shoots that will be wanting to have a piece of undiscovered market share. Ti and companies like them are counting on it.
I can't speak for the hardware vendors, but it does bring a stable release cycle. If you're basing off of Debian, do you plan for lenny or lenny+1, and what do you do when you slip, or when they slip? Several DDs seem to pride themselves on the fact that it ships "when its done". This is stupid for several reasons, the easiest of which to point out is that with no automated software testing, Debian only has a record of reported bugs, not all bugs. "Perfect" Debian releases is one more reason the software comes out later than sooner.
Canonical also likely brings something to the table, with their build infrastructure running on ARMs hardware. You might look at it like this: Canonical knows Debian well enough to hire and work with Debian when hardware vendors can't or don't. So yes, Ubuntu/Canonical isn't much different than Debian, but they're the go-to guy when you want Debian technology.
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin