"R. Paul McCarty" wrote: > > It seems like the only real advantage of Crusoe over StrongArm is the > fact that you can move existing desktop applications, and OSs directly > to the new chip from x86 architectures. Other low power chipsets require > alot of work to port an OS or application to the new chip, along with > writing a whole new set of drivers. I also suspect there are some memory > management and floating point performance issues that make the Crusoe > chip much more attractive for mobile computing then the other chips. I was half listening to the live broadcast yesterday, and I'm almost sure I heard then say that there wasn't a floating point unit on the crusoe ?? can anybody confirm this ?? > > If full blown Windows, and Linux ran on StrongArm would this product > still be as exciting? in my opinion, no ;).. but considering that the Crusoe has variable self adjusting core voltage, self adjusting clock speeds up to 750 Mhz, and a 20 miliwatts sleep mode ;).. that sounds impressive to me ;) Scoobz > > -Paul > -- > R. Paul McCarty / rpmc@troi.cc.rochester.edu / x52059 > 317 Lattimore Hall, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627 > Life is nothing if you're not obsessed. -Pecker > > -- > Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of > "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to wear-hard-request@haven.org > Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Neill Newman Tel: Mobile 07970 673722 Department of Electronics Systems Engineering Work 01206 873708 University of Essex Fax: Work 01206 872900 http://wearables.essex.ac.uk/index.html email: njnewm@essex.ac.uk ----------------------------------------------------------------------
From Comp.sys.wearables Newsgroup Archive (CSW)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail