Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Signs License With ARM

G143 and several other readers let us know that Microsoft has signed a licensing deal with ARM. "Microsoft signed an agreement with the UK-based ARM, giving Microsoft access to some of the chip designer's intellectual property. The two companies have worked together since 1997, but Ian Drew, ARM's EVP of marketing, said this is the first time Microsoft has become a licensee of ARM's architecture, a move which will allow Microsoft to design their own microarchitecture. Other licensees include Qualcomm, Marvell, and Infineon. Neither company would reveal the cost of the license. Speculation about Microsoft's intentions includes wondering whether the company is taking aim at the iPad, or perhaps looking to produce a next-generation Xbox without the 360's heat problems."

11 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Even more worrisome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is the soon to be announced licensing with And A Leg Technologies.

  2. Intel's reaction by bonch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wonder what Intel's response is, especially since Microsoft is such a long-time partner. Apple went with A4, and here Microsoft is licensing ARM too. The emerging market is mobile computing, so what's the future for Intel? Surely, they can't live on x86 forever, and Atom currently isn't competitive with ARM when it comes to battery life.

  3. Already done, thank you very much by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The ARM core is so widely licensed that it would be hard to find a modern handheld device that does NOT contain one.

    "Many semiconductor or IC design firms hold ARM licenses; Analog Devices, Atmel, Broadcom, Cirrus Logic, Energy Micro, Faraday Technology, Freescale, Fujitsu, Intel (through its settlement with Digital Equipment Corporation), IBM, Infineon Technologies, Nintendo, NXP Semiconductors, OKI, Qualcomm, Samsung, Sharp, STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments and VLSI are some of the many companies who have licensed the ARM in one form or another" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture#ARM_licensees

    IMHO, this is a non-story.

    --
    Wherever You Go, There You Are
    1. Re:Already done, thank you very much by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is something of a story, though: "Many semiconductor or IC design firms hold ARM licenses". Microsoft is, historically, neither of those things and; because of the number of existing ARM licensees, they can already get virtually any ARM based SoC configuration that you could reasonably desire, at highly competitive prices, off the shelf, without any sort of license.

      Microsoft using ARM cores would be a total non-story. I'm pretty sure that they already do, in a number of capacities. Becoming an ARM licensee, though, means that you have a plan that goes well beyond shoving some off-the-shelf chips into your product. Since MS doesn't seem like a logical entrant into the chip fab market, this development means that they have some kind of design demand up their sleeve that the market for commodity SoCs hasn't delivered....

    2. Re:Already done, thank you very much by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I had a couple of 'why' questions and found a possible answer.

      This Intel forum:
      http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showthread.php?t=67843

      Contains many complaints about the performance of the Intel compiler under WinCE (as well as Intel selling it all off to Marvel).

      If you ask me, MS wants a chip that they can optimize for their OS. Seems liek this will lead it down a proprietary hole, not unlike Apple.

      So, is that the real story, "MicroSoft, now more like Apple!"

      --
      Wherever You Go, There You Are
  4. Pocket XBox, anyone? by FreonTrip · · Score: 3, Funny
    Any number of potential reasons exist for this license, but that's the one which bubbles to mind most readily.

    In before the "What's that giant thing in your pocket?" "That's what she said!" engine gets warm.

  5. Re:Hmm... by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "... ARMs supporting a CLR environment...."

    Actually, that would be my guess: Microsoft wants to make an ARM chip that implements the Common Language Runtime in the microarchitecture, just as some ARM chips now implement the Java runtime in the microarchitecture. They may also want to add instructions to bring even more Trusted Platform Computing Model down into the ARM core.

    They may also want to make an ARM core that implements a graphics accelerator more friendly to the Direct3D model (and less friendly to OpenGL ES) than is currently available.

  6. Re:XBox Portable? by Tom9729 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most (all?) Windows Mobile devices already run on ARM. Windows CE has supported ARM since 1997.

  7. Re:Hmm... by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Microsoft wants to make an ARM chip that implements the Common Language Runtime in the microarchitecture

    The thought of Microsoft shipping code that they cannot patch later is at least somewhat amusing to me.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  8. Re:XBox Portable? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

    It also doesn't make much sense for Microsoft to change the xbox architecture that much, since it has always been basically a PC and it has all the same systems like DirectX, .NET and the usual compatibility with Windows.

    I just had to check the calendar to make sure it wasn't 2001.

    They abandoned the PC-like architecture with the 360. It now runs a PowerPC hybrid chip.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  9. Re:Hmm... by Brit_in_the_USA · · Score: 3, Informative

    That said, a Desktop level performance ARM chip is something that hasn't been done yet,

    It has been done. I used to own a RISC PC desktop with 200Mhz StrongARM CPU at the time x86 PC's were maxing out with 90MHz Pentium. Other than in FP applications it ran laps around the Intel chips of the time.
    It is also worth noting the StrongARM was in a plastic package with no heatsink as it dispated so little heat.

    Ultimately the platform stalled at this CPU achievement and Intel eventually caught up and surpassed (on the speed front anyway). I often wonder if (the lack of speed bumps to StrongARM for a very long time) had anything to do with Intel taking over the design/manufacture.