Slashdot Mirror


Intel Fires Warning Shot At Qualcomm and Microsoft Over Windows 10 ARM Emulation (hothardware.com)

MojoKid quotes a report from HotHardware: Qualcomm and Microsoft are on the verge of ushering in a new class of always-connected mobile devices that run full-blown Windows 10. The two are enabling ARM-based Snapdragon 835 processors to run Windows 10 with full x86 emulation, meaning that devices will be capable of not only running Universal Windows Platform (UWP) apps from the Windows Store, but legacy win32 apps as well. There is little question, Intel is likely none too pleased with it and PC OEM heavyweights Lenovo, Hewlett-Packard and ASUS have also signed-on to deliver Windows 10 notebooks and 2-in-1 convertibles powered by Qualcomm. Until now, Intel sat by quietly while all of this unfolded, but the company today took the opportunity to get a bit passive-aggressive while announcing the fast-approaching 40th anniversary of the world's first x86 microprocessor. The majority of the press release reads like a trip down memory lane. However, Intel shifts into serious mama bear mode, with significant legal posturing, touting its willingness to protect its "x86 innovations." Intel goes on to say that Transmeta tried and ultimately failed in the marketplace, and has been dead and buried for a decade. The company then pivots, almost daring Microsoft and Qualcomm to challenge it by making Windows on ARM devices commercially available. "Only time will tell if new attempts to emulate Intel's x86 ISA will meet a different fate. Intel welcomes lawful competition... However, we do not welcome unlawful infringement of our patents, and we fully expect other companies to continue to respect Intel's intellectual property rights."

21 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. Can go either way by Luckyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Between the fact that current ISA is actually AMD64 (which is x86 compatible, but not intel-designed) and the fact that many key patents should have expired by now, it's going to be interesting if intel has the legal bass to actually stop this from happening.

    1. Re:Can go either way by gweihir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As far as I remember, emulation is not covered by the patents anyways, as an instruction-set is basically an API. Does anybody know whether this is accurate?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Can go either way by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Informative

      Between the fact that current ISA is actually AMD64 (which is x86 compatible, but not intel-designed) and the fact that many key patents should have expired by now, it's going to be interesting if intel has the legal bass to actually stop this from happening.

      Yeah. Even AMD64 is almost 15 years old by now. They might have patents on some newer additions (maybe no AVX emulation?), but what can still be patented about x86?

    3. Re:Can go either way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The other hilarious part of this is that Intel shipped ARM emulation code for x86-based Android devices for a few years before totally failing to gain any traction and giving up.

    4. Re:Can go either way by PPalmgren · · Score: 4, Funny

      Honestly? I'm more interested in what Intel's legal bass tastes like. Is it more like a sea bass, or one of those skanky lake bass? This is important stuff.

    5. Re: Can go either way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is Skanky Lake the next generation of processors beyond Kaby Lake and Ice Lake?

    6. Re:Can go either way by slashdice · · Score: 3, Informative

      DEC sued Intel over something or other and as part of the settlement, Intel bought StrongARM off of DEC.

      --
      Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
    7. Re:Can go either way by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      Microsoft/Qualcomm aren't emulating AMD64, though, they're only supporting 32-bit x86 apps. If they want to avoid any patents at all and went back 20 years, they might run into some compatibility issues, because 1997 puts them before every single marketed instruction set extension: MMX was introduced in 1997, so getting in just before that, you're basically back to the 486 or early pre-MMX Pentium 1.

      The question is, how much modern Windows software is ABI compatible with the 486, and doesn't assume MMX or SSE support?

    8. Re:Can go either way by caseih · · Score: 2

      Don't know why you think that. Nearly all Windows applications are "legacy" applications right now. Meaning Win32 api. If devs could just select ARM from the Visual Studio target drop-down box and hit go, they'd be all over that I think. Maybe not things like Adobe products, unless they see a big enough market. But for things like office applications such as MS Office, Quicken, Chrome, Firefox, etc (the apps people actually use vs Windows Store), you can be that if VS supports the ARM target, they will be there. Really win32 is going to be with us for many years yet. And having an easy way to target ARM with that api scares Intel. They don't seem to be scare of universal Windows apps, which by definition are more portable between architectures.

      Arm is really fast enough for many things that people use every day if VS made it easy to target without resorting to C# and universal apps. Heck even with emulation of x86 it's fast enough for some things like basic tasks in MS Office.

      If the choice was porting a "legacy" app to a universal metro app, then yeah you'd be correct.

  2. Re:The Big Question Is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, here are two demos of x86 Win32 emulation in Windows 10 on ARM:

    1. A shorter, more marketing orientated demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_GlGglbu1U
    2. A longer, more "show me stuff" orientated demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSXUDKpkbx4

  3. Intel, can you read... by OpenSourced · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...the writing on the wall?

    The future is mobile, and in mobile RISC wins (for now). First you emulate, then you go native. Microsoft has seen the new Samsung S8 working as a desktop replacement with a dock, and is sweating cold. If that trend goes on (and why shouldn't it, as phones become more powerful), and mobile apps adapt to the "desktop mode", soon Windows will have a real competitor. I can see plane stewardesses distributing keyboards to the passengers, so as to use the entertainment screens with your "desktop mobile". I can see "laptops" that are just a screen, a keyboard, a humongous battery and a dock bay for your phone.

    You cannot fight the tide. In three years smartphones will ship with 1 Tb storage, 16 Gb memory, and 16 cores CPU. All of them itching to do something more demanding than displaying your last photo of your cat. If Microsoft doesn't emulate in firmware, VMWare will emulate in software, and soon you won't care in which OS is your app working. You will have one and only one computer, that will incidentally have the capacity of making phone calls. Congratulations everybody, we are just now entering the era of the PC.

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
    1. Re:Intel, can you read... by fubarrr · · Score: 2, Funny

      > In multithreaded performance they might get some wins, but that's only because they have an insane amount of cores,

      10 cores should be enough for everybody

    2. Re:Intel, can you read... by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Sorry, sir, it's the last row and we're out of QWERTYs --- is Dvorak fine?"

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    3. Re:Intel, can you read... by Osgeld · · Score: 2

      yea but the vast majority of people dont care if its faster than an i3 or compiling anything, it just needs to be fast enough to edit a picture and run office

    4. Re:Intel, can you read... by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2

      The wins for business are
      (a) fanless computers (office noise)
      (b) lower purchase price
      (c) lower energy bills

      Cuthberta Cubicle-Worker won't have a noisy Core i7 beige tower on her desk if a tiny ARM64 device does the job.

  4. "Intel welcomes lawful competition" by Zuriel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have heard that Intel is delighted about AMD's new 32 core server CPU and 16 core desktop CPU. If I remember correctly, the last time Intel was this delighted with AMD they started bribing system manufacturers into not offering any AMD-based products.

  5. Alternative explanation by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Proposition: Apple are planning to release low end macOS products based on their ARM64 SoCs.

    Imagine having a common ARM-based hardware spec for Watch, Mac Mini, iPhone, iPad, MacBook and iMac - only select 'Pro' models would require Intel Inside.

    Such a transition would require checking an extra box in XCode for fat-binaries. Optionally they could develop a Rosetta-style translation layer for 'legacy' amd64 only binaries.

    1. Re:Alternative explanation by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      Apple customers have already played the "buy a new version of the same software at full price or eat a performance penalty" game twice now (680x0 -> PPC, PPC -> x64). While Apple has magnificently pulled off these transitions, their software partners have in large part been amazingly douchey about it. Especially the software vendors that most Mac shops depend on the most: the creative and business titles like Adobe, Microsoft; and back in the day, Quark.

      Quark was the WORST, and quite frankly I'm surprised they are still in business after Adobe launched InDesign.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  6. Re:The Big Question Is... by stooo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >> What about something more CPU-heavy like ... Blender, Handbrake ...

    For those ones, you don't need x86 emulation, as you can use an ARM compiled version, the source is available.

    Fot the other proprietary stuff, perhaps some will be released in an ARM binary form, especially if ARM laptops and even desktops become popular in the future ....

    --
    aaaaaaa
  7. Re:Faster than a Core i5 mobile by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, because Intel hasn't been there with AMD before. Remember the Pentium 4 with it's ridiculously deep pipeline and equally ridiculous branch prediction failure rate? Intel got complacent and was more concerned with Ghz than actual performance. AMD pulled ahead.

    Then the sleeping giant woke up and where has AMD been for the last 11 years? 2nd place, and usually a distant second.

    I'm glad that AMD is putting out a few good products these days - it's been a while. And it keeps everyone honest. I want a strong AMD, because in the end we all win when Intel can't just sit on a silo of laurels; the same way I want a strong Apple *and* Android. Tough competition benefits the customers.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  8. Re:Hardware Backdoors by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 2
    Most probably, the average Android phone has vendor supplied binary blobs galore.

    The good news is that this week Freescale's iMX6 was freed - it can boot Android blob-free. It's not a widely popular SoC though, in terms of market share in phones and tablets.