OESF | ELSI | pdaXrom | OpenZaurus | Zaurus Themes | Community Links | Ibiblio


Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Intel X86-based Development
post Jul 28 2006, 07:41 AM
Post #1

Group: Members
Posts: 1,002
Joined: 28-April 05
From: Germany
Member No.: 7,027


wouldn't it be better, instead of using another XScale processor, to wait for intel making the first reliable steppings of their planned x86 PDA processors?
That would allow to run a much larger variety of software, beginning with simpler systems like MS-DOS, over Windows 95 and XP, up to "normal" Linux distributions.

We'd not be tied to special software versions, compilig of the apps especially for the PDA etc., but just use the stuff we can buy or download as binaries.

It was posted here some time ago I think, but for those who don't remember:

(Also search google for "intel sells xscale")

Personally, I have used the HP 200LX (x86-based palmtop developed in 1993 with 186 8MHz CPU and 640kB RAM, running DOS) for about 8 years, before I switched to the Zaurus in 2005.
The Zaurus is great in terms of screen, speed, touchscreen, Multimedia etc.
But the 200LX was far superior when it comes to usability of thousands of available software programs, downloadable for free from the Internet.
With the zaurus, I could never reach the level of productivity I reached with the HP in even a shorter time than I have the Zaurus now. And that's only due to missing software.

I can not even say the Zaurus is more flexible due to the Linux system.
DOS is also VERY flexible when it comes to configuration and batch programming, if you only know some hidden tricks.

If I hadn't migrated all my PIM stuff etc. to the Zaurus already, I'd seriously consider to switch back to the HP.

Would waiting for a PDA-x86 processor be an option for this project?

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
post Dec 7 2006, 02:00 AM
Post #2

Group: Members
Posts: 1,565
Joined: 7-April 05
From: Sydney, Australia
Member No.: 6,806

funny thing is that x86 has had so much development to compinsate for those deficincies, take alook at the benchmaarks for gcc compilers and you tend to see that x86 code runs faster, smaller and compiles quicker. its sad but true people are just a bit to familliar with it (i balme windows wink.gif, personally i would lave to see miicrosoft move into other processor markets, specifically sparc and power PC. and im not ttalking about winece)

i did look at the via chipss awhile ago but when it comes to low power x86 chips arenot your best friend, it may be nice thaat the new AMD chips idlee at 6W however a fully loaded ARM chip runs at about 1W max

i wish i new x86 asm better (and more specifically thhe amd64 extensions) as from what i can see the processor exsists in "modes" each with a compleattly new instruction set. if this is the case then i imagine the microcode would be huge (andtherefore consume alot of power)

i also connsidered power PC but in terms of power they are more for "wall connected" devices, there is a reason why nearlly all wifi cards have an arm7 processor and why nearrly all mobiles are an arm processor, they are just so light on thepower usage compared to most other chips. but then again its thier primary drive unlike the other guys who add it on as a "feature" rather than an "architecule desiign requierment"

arm is nicce but i think that x86 is starting to cllean up after itself, as i said earlier performance is secondary, they only add features if it gives a good performance boost, has few tranisitors and a low power reqquiremnt. aand even then i think they would only make it optional (ARM only sells designs not actual chips, you get the code, plugin a few varibles and it spits out a design)

i would still love to get a quad core chipset however it seems like no one is offering them except as an ASIC, now if i had the case i would get a custom built ASIC with nearlly everything on board (huge power savingss) howerver i dont have the time or money sad.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
daniel3000   Intel X86-based Development   Jul 28 2006, 07:41 AM
Ferret-Simpson   If you read that thread, they're looking at ch...   Jul 28 2006, 08:01 AM
koen   QUOTE(Ferret-Simpson @ Jul 28 2006, 04:0...   Jul 29 2006, 08:24 AM
Da_Blitz   Wow, some people know how te really annoy me bas...   Jul 29 2006, 08:15 AM
Ferret-Simpson   Sorry DB! And I meant intel, not Marvell. In...   Jul 29 2006, 09:06 AM
Da_Blitz   well you probbely havent worked out the the securi...   Jul 30 2006, 07:12 PM
Ferret-Simpson   If you remember we already had this discussion in ...   Jul 31 2006, 01:27 AM
Da_Blitz   i biring it up again because intel dosent control ...   Jul 31 2006, 01:43 AM
Ferret-Simpson   Another point towards going for this one first. . ...   Jul 31 2006, 02:14 AM
Da_Blitz   umm... yeah... i feel really assured now   Jul 31 2006, 03:25 AM
Ferret-Simpson   XD Well, when you've built the thing, you...   Jul 31 2006, 03:27 AM
danboid   I know DB really really doesn't like x86 but w...   Aug 10 2006, 09:54 AM
daniel3000   QUOTE(danboid @ Aug 10 2006, 07:54 PM)DOS bet...   Aug 10 2006, 11:59 AM
danboid   For a speadsheet- why would you need anything bett...   Aug 10 2006, 02:21 PM
daniel3000   QUOTE(danboid @ Aug 11 2006, 12:21 AM)For a s...   Aug 11 2006, 12:44 AM
Da_Blitz   the pim functions (at least the teext based files ...   Aug 11 2006, 11:25 PM
Ferret-Simpson   A batch file version of qCalendar. XD I want to se...   Aug 24 2006, 03:15 PM
Da_Blitz   have a look at a program called remind, its actual...   Aug 26 2006, 05:46 AM
Reaper   Well, x86-compatible PDA is very reasonable thing ...   Oct 1 2006, 08:53 AM
Da_Blitz   true, latley i have been thinking of getting a UMP...   Oct 2 2006, 04:46 AM
Ferret-Simpson   Nono, It's not a figment of your imagination. ...   Oct 9 2006, 10:29 AM
Da_Blitz   i was looking at the sparc VI chips the other day ...   Oct 9 2006, 04:34 PM
Ragnorok   - I have to toss out no to x86, but having done th...   Dec 6 2006, 06:59 PM
stampsm   QUOTE(Ragnorok @ Dec 6 2006, 06:59 PM)- I hav...   Dec 6 2006, 11:48 PM
Da_Blitz   funny thing is that x86 has had so much developmen...   Dec 7 2006, 02:00 AM

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th May 2015 - 05:58 AM