Return to the archive index

Re: Crusoe versus StrongArm, Super H, etc.

From: Rehmi Post <rehmi@media.mit.edu>
Date: Fri Jan 21 20:57:17 2000
Newsgroups: comp.sys.wearables

Vaughan Pratt wrote:

> A decade or more ago it made sense to consider alternatives to the x86.
> With the continuing maturation of a wide range of x86 software, of which
> MS is the dominant but by no means only vendor, the attractiveness of
> the alternatives has been on a steady downslide for more than a decade.

Oh, I suppose that's why NT has been distributed for some time for both x86
and Alpha platforms, why Windows CE is distributed for two architectures (MIPS
R4000 and SH-3), why most of this year's MP3 players will use Crystal/Cirrus'
ARM core decoder chips because they consume less power than the Intermetall
ASICs, and why Crusoe is giving the industry a clear transition strategy. Oh,
and why most of the Web is fueled by Sun SPARC servers.

Give me a break.  Architectural diversity is more alive than it was in the
days when the Vax, the 68k, and the '370 dominated. The presence of an
artificially  large market for a proprietary platform is immaterial to
research, only to ease of procurement.

    -Rehmi

Return to archive index | Next message in thread


From Comp.sys.wearables Newsgroup Archive (CSW)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty

Archive created with babymail