Japan eyes Linux 45
NEC, the world's second largest semiconductor manufacturer,
believes that the sucess of
Linux would allow another microprocessor architecture
to be established in the PC market. If Linux becomes mainstream,
the basis for microprocessor competition would be cost/performance and
not architecture. Although NEC might design its own processor
architecture for Linux, it's more likely that they use the
existing MIPS architecture. In related news,
Justsystem will port its Ichitaro word processing program
to Linux, and offer in July ATOK, a program for
Japanese-language input.
it isn't (Score:1)
うれしい！ (Score:1)
e.
MIPS is cool (Score:1)
TedC
NT for Alpha (Score:1)
NT Alpha (Score:1)
Also note that an NT / Linux capable Alpha box will run your $2000 these days. Something to think about the next time Intel chips seem rather slow...
BTW - read up on FX!32. It's an emulator / translator that converts x86 to Alpha and runs at about 70% of Alpha-native performance on average, placing the Alpha as the fastest x86 system.
It makes sense (Score:1)
､隍ｫ､ﾃ､ｿ､ﾇ､ｹ､ﾍ｡ｪ (Score:1)
Kinput (Score:1)
It looked pretty cool.
Part of the trouble is the font issue with X.
Lack of information? (Score:1)
x86 dominates due to it being what DOS/doze runs on - cheapness through volume - not because it is architecturally superior (or even good)
Linux's excellent cross platform portability means that there is no tie to a single family of chips
Alpha, ARM and MIPS can already compete with x86 on price, this is a GOOD THING[tm]
Kinput (Score:1)
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
StrongARMs (Score:1)
A new architecture would be cool, especially if it's MIPS based. But remember, processor price/performance isn't necessarily what matters. Get decent-quality standard motherboards which take your processors in the shops at less that $150 and you're probably onto a winner.
Quick! Kill yourself...now! (Score:1)
Bon voyage!
you dipshit (Score:1)
j--------
MIPS-based prtables running Linux... (Score:1)
j--------
A Call for Immediate All-Out Nuclear Attack (Score:1)
Lack of information? (Score:1)
.
Lack of information? (Score:1)
One argument is that Windows is primarily available only for Intel-compatible chips. But you have clone makers like AMD and Cyrix building chips with more efficient architectures that Windows can run on already, and you can get NT for the Alpha or the Sparc or whatever else you want.
The only other argument that I can think of is that Linux is able to handle multi-processor and multi-box systems more gracefully than Windows, allowing you to use multiple cheap processors, but network and bus bandwidth limit the performance of these systems more than processor power does (n chips do not perform n times as fast as one chip in most cases).
As far as I can tell, the market already _is_ dominated by cost/performance. x86 chips and clones aren't wonderful for speed, but compared to the alternatives they are cheap, and so are bought.
､隍ｫ､ﾃ､ｿ､ﾇ､ｹ､ﾍ｡ｪ (Score:1)
Right. Go ask NEC how many Windows NT MIPS systems were sold.
(Just so no one forgets, in the USA, NEC is just another word for Packard Bell. There stuff is complete crapo.)
--
NT SpacStation (Score:1)
The closest thing is WABI, which last time I
checked was an old Windows version running
on emulation - gack
As for the "Alpha" port. Does MS still support
that ? And what apps have been ported to it besides minesweeper ???
Your last line;
> x86 chips and clones aren't wonderful for speed,
> but compared
> to the alternatives they are cheap,
> and so are bought.
... Soooo
x86 chips are cheap because of Windows, whereas
other and better architectures are expensive
because they don't run on Windows. Maybe running
Linux will be a big selling point and they can
sell lots of systems and drive the price down.
What are you trying to say ???
I expected this... (Score:1)
- We have open-source compilers
- We have an open-source OS
- A lot of interesting programs are open-source
- The OS is portable to different architectures
All you need to support a new architecture is typeing "make". Okay, almost, but if the developers cared about endian or sizeof(int) problems, it will just be a compile.
This is a reason, why I bought a PowerMac. Would it be only the closed-source MacOS I wouldn't have done it, but the Linux/PPC port and the PPC architecture lead to the decision to buy a PPC.
fat binaries, anyone? (Score:1)
NT for WHAT?!? (Score:1)
The only OS that'll run on anything you want is NetBSD. (but Linux is catching up fast!)
NT for Alpha - 32 bit? (Score:1)
Mike
--
Java Instruction set (Score:1)
NT for Alpha - 32 bit? (Score:1)
､隍ｫ､ﾃ､ｿ､ﾇ､ｹ､ﾍ｡ｪ (Score:1)
But now that iMacs make up 70% of new machine purchases in the last year....