Gary Johnson and Jon Huntsman are both moderates (Johnson is, as far as I can tell, secular, while Huntsman is quietly Mormon). Of course, neither of them have much of a chance of winning the nomination, despite both having excellent political credentials.
Where can I get an x64 or ARM system that scales to 32 or 64 sockets? The RISC/mainframe market is a totally different animal, one that those chips don't even play in.
That being said, SPARC is pretty badly behind, even compared to Itanium, and in the dust compared to last year's Power7.
The SSE extensions are ugly, if you're including that in the category of x86.
Lack of FMA support..
Relatively starved for registers, although since it's not a load/store arch (another issue, imho) that matters less than it does in, say, ARM.
There are also implementation issues (lack of a directory cache makes scalability suck), but architecturally, it's a pretty standard and slightly boring CISC. I don't quite understand all the hate it gets - it does tend to be slower than Power or z, and doesn't scale well, but the problems are implementation problems, not architectural ones.
It's just yet another attempt of Intel to make x86 chips take over the high-end server market, as they've been trying to do since the early or mid 90's. x86 is like fusion power in that regard - it's always just a few years from evicting the RISC and mainframe architectures from their niches, no matter when you ask.
Symbian was the top-selling smartphone OS until fairly recently, with extremely strong market share in Europe and Asia. I wouldn't call ~50% of global smartphone sales "never had significant market share."
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong. You could only do it on touchscreen devices before 2008. My WM2003 device (keyboard-free!) did it fine.
Gary Johnson and Jon Huntsman are both moderates (Johnson is, as far as I can tell, secular, while Huntsman is quietly Mormon). Of course, neither of them have much of a chance of winning the nomination, despite both having excellent political credentials.
OEL for SPARC has already been announced.
"The only difference between PHP and C++ is syntax."
Write a driver in PHP.
The N810's implementation of Maemo used a taskbar (on the left of the screen), and it worked just fine.
More than one activity tied directly to the launcher, not more than one activity period.
"Commercial workloads" in this case refers to OLTP, BI, and similar workloads. HPC falls into the category of "technical workloads."
Clusters don't perform on commercial workloads.
You need it for big databases that require massive amounts of I/O and memory bandwidth.
Where can I get an x64 or ARM system that scales to 32 or 64 sockets? The RISC/mainframe market is a totally different animal, one that those chips don't even play in.
That being said, SPARC is pretty badly behind, even compared to Itanium, and in the dust compared to last year's Power7.
It doesn't have a Tegra, it has an OMAP4, which is faster (due to having support for vector instructions.)
How well are those "Android tablets" that you mentioned doing again? Have Honeycomb sales just blown everyone away?
The phone and tablet markets are rapidly expanding, and there's room for new systems in those spaces.
Nobody else is making big iron? IBM, HP, Fujitsu, Unisys, Hitachi, NEC, and Groupe Bull are just irrelevant?
No block-level scope. No threads. No support for strong typing. No inheritance.
A server with the new Sandy Bridge Xeons and the MIC Larrabee coprocessors.
HP Integrity's been in second place behind IBM Power and ahead of SPARC for a while.
Did you read your own Wikipedia article? FMA isn't in any shipping Intel x86 CPU.
Variable-length instructions are also kind of annoying. (Yes, replying to myself is bad form)
The SSE extensions are ugly, if you're including that in the category of x86.
Lack of FMA support..
Relatively starved for registers, although since it's not a load/store arch (another issue, imho) that matters less than it does in, say, ARM.
There are also implementation issues (lack of a directory cache makes scalability suck), but architecturally, it's a pretty standard and slightly boring CISC. I don't quite understand all the hate it gets - it does tend to be slower than Power or z, and doesn't scale well, but the problems are implementation problems, not architectural ones.
I'd say it qualifies as both RISC and EPIC/VLIW. It fits both categories. They aren't mutually exclusive.
It's just yet another attempt of Intel to make x86 chips take over the high-end server market, as they've been trying to do since the early or mid 90's. x86 is like fusion power in that regard - it's always just a few years from evicting the RISC and mainframe architectures from their niches, no matter when you ask.
How does Itanium not qualify? It's a load-store ISA with fixed-length instructions. Is that not the normal definition of RISC?
A non-entity outside a few X terminals and RAID controllers.
Symbian was the top-selling smartphone OS until fairly recently, with extremely strong market share in Europe and Asia. I wouldn't call ~50% of global smartphone sales "never had significant market share."