Windows laptops in 2017 could act and feel more like a phone

Where were you when the laptop went full cuck?

Microsoft wants its computers to be more nimble.

To that goal, the Qualcomm announced at Microsoft's Windows Hardware Engineering Community event on Wednesday that its Windows 10 devices will support the Snapdragon 835 processor, which you'll see in many top-tier phones next year.

Microsoft's move attempts to close the gap between phones, tablets and computers. By supporting Qualcomm's more power-efficient chip, future laptops could act much more like your phone: always turned on and connected online. You can also expect to see smaller designs that don't require fans, as well as more touchscreen laptops.

cnet.com/news/windows-laptops-in-2017-could-act-and-feel-more-like-a-phone/

Other urls found in this thread:

www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2016/EECS-2016-130.html
ftp.OpenBSD.org/pub/OpenBSD/6.0/armv7/INSTALL.armv7
events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/petazzoni-device-tree-dummies.pdf
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Laptop with non-replaceable proprietary botnetted 3-4G modem with DMA (like in most smartphones) would be a disaster if it gets normie approval.

...

ARM laptops sound neat for power savings, but packing the modem into the chip sounds stupid. At least there's that Rockchip Chromebook.

Who would possibly think "Yes, exactly what I needed, an oversized smartphone! Brilliant!"

ARM chips are going to be the future I suppose, in terms of heat and power saving it will be the point of attraction.

...

People that own tablets.

What is this even supposed to mean?

As someone who really doesn't use their laptop for anything that requires much processing power, I can see why this would appeal to people. Though I personally don't like how modern ARM processors (at least every SBC with a 64 bit ARM processor that I've read about) require blobs signed by the manufacturer to boot, or devices with non removable cellular modems in general (especially not one with DMA like this will likely have).

It's weird that just yesterday I was thinking about how cool a more modern version of Apple's eMate 300 or Psion's netBook (or other laptops with specs comparable to a PDA from the time) would be that wasn't a tablet with a flimsy keyboard slapped on, though I really don't like it when seeing what it ended up as.

Wow, even that thing looks more comfortable to type on than modern laptop.

Why? I use my laptop for actual work. Turning it into a phone would turn it from portable workstation into huge fucking tablet/phone.

Sweet, I'd love an ARM laptop.

They're trying that AGAIN?!

Ask Apple :^)

...

Already is

Even on tablets you can disable tablet mode though, which is nice because tablet mode is ass. Its actually better to use a desktop interface with a touchscreen than a touchscreen-oriented interface. Why can't UI designers understand this?

We will always need a high-performance bracket though. And ARM will never be able to fulfill that because it has such a low performance ceiling compared to x86_64. People have experienced horrible scaling limitations on ARM chips

You went out of read-only mode too early.

Proof?

Reality
Back in 2014 companies were hyping 20 core ARM server chips
Today the ARM server market is dead. The highest performance ARM chips are the Qualcomm Centriq 2400 which performs nowhere near as well as Intel's offerings for the same market segment and price. It's very clear ARM hits an IPC wall after a certain point and it's why it's been restricted to low-power consumption devices. ARM started out as a home computer architecture mind you. It's nonexistent in high performance computing for a good reason

We need the age of home-printable electronics to come ASAP

Well, Apple doesn't deal in electronics, they deal in lifestyle products.

I do not see a proof that this is the reason behind this.

The real reason is that Windoze runs only on x86 and 95% people want it.

Nobody wants to code an OS and applications explicitly for a 48 core ARM CPU, it will never be worth it.

ARM is great at the low end, better than x86 when it comes to smaller die size, price, less heat, lower power usage. Intel pulled out of mobile because they were hemorrhaging money trying to use atom to compete with ARM.

There are drawbacks to scaling ARM to the high end, once you crank up the clockspeed and the number of cores to try to compensate for the simplicity of each core and its simplified instruction set, you end up losing pretty much all of its advantages. ARM isn't magical, it fits a particular niche very well but it isn't going to usurp x86.

How is that related to performance?

Because ARM will never compete with x86 performance when it comes to single threaded tasks?

If you take an A72 and crank it up to 6Ghz you may start to get something resembling desktop x86 performance. It will probably use more power, produce more heat and become far more expensive due to the low yields of CPUs able to reach that frequency. At that point it's better to just go with x86.

Read up on CISC vs RISC design philosophies, there are pros and cons to each one. One isn't magically better than the other at everything. There are always tradeoffs.

Not many people need the power of a portable workstation, so a product like this makes sense to offer for those people who don't need that power yet still want a full desktop OS, keyboard, and a larger screen than a tablet. High end lines aren't going to go away. Outside the problem of the integrated cellular modem I don't see much of a problem with this. If you're worried about freedom and ARM processors being locked down, consumer laptops already have been with every new model requiring signed firmware, featuring Intel's ME/AMD's PSP, and having potential secure boot problems, so this will not change anything in that regard. Also, anyone want to guess how the 8 core 2.2 GHz Kyro based processor they're talking about using compares to the Intel Core2 Duo T9800 clocked at 2.93 GHz that the highest end libreboot supported Thinkpad T400 uses?


"x86 desktop performance" isn't very descriptive. x86 desktop performance from what year? High end? Low end?

pls email [email protected]/* */ if you're a cat named sakamoto and want a cute furret to lick your paws
Big_Boobie_Barbara_Bangarang_Bonanza_Bippity_Boppity_Boo

pls email [email protected]/* */ if you're a cat named sakamoto and want a cute furret to lick your paws
I think we are more of an octopus based on our body shape.

pls email [email protected]/* */ if you're a cat named sakamoto and want a cute furret to lick your paws
wow that smoothing brush is exactly what I wanted

thank you

I've used a bunch of those to make flat-bottomed bootcover/shoes and they're sooo comfortable to wear. not croc-y at all either

We're the best at everything user

What kind of jobs can I find in Singapore? My IT Company has a location there but I cant seem to get a transfer yet...

Can I teach English there? Isn't it expensive as fuck?

u need pay more taxes to feed [redacted]

ARM is actually a more free and open architecture than x86 right now, so this excites me.

Here, have a read.

Reduced Instruction Set Computer (RISC) can match, and even
exceed, the performance and code density of existing commercial
Complex Instruction Set Computers (CISC) while maintaining
the simplicity and cost-effectiveness that underpins the original
RISC goals


www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2016/EECS-2016-130.html

What do you mean by "blob needed to boot"? Is this something like UEFI, or something the OS has to load like a driver?

Every 64 bit ARM SBC I've read about requires a signed bootloader blob/blobs (ARM SBCs have multiple stage bootloaders).

WOW JUST WOW THIS IS HORRIBLE I HATE EVERYTHING WOW JUST WOW THIS IS THE MOST TERRIBLE THING EVER

But i dont like this

Cool.

ISHYGDDT

...

It's kind of confusing, because OpenBSD only works on arm7 boards, but in the install doc they talk about Device Tree Blob file.
ftp.OpenBSD.org/pub/OpenBSD/6.0/armv7/INSTALL.armv7

The device tree blob isn't always closed source, though it can be distributed that way. Here's a decent description of it:
events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/petazzoni-device-tree-dummies.pdf

Even the fastest arm chip can't hold a candle to a mid range x86/AMD64 cpu

Disliking idiotic buzzwords doesn't mean you don't know what they mean

Your claim is meaningless without specifics of what you consider to be "mid range" and how the processors are being compared.

I'm not looking for fast. I don't play modern games, don't watch movies, and almost alway use simple web browser (Lynx and such).