Why are "they" trying to kill x86? This must be the 6,000,000th million proclamation that x86 is going to die.

Why are "they" trying to kill x86? This must be the 6,000,000th million proclamation that x86 is going to die.

https://hackaday.com/2024/03/21/why-x86-needs-to-die/

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

POSIWID: The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not sure what's wrong with "NI0"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah it's crazy though if you're an AI and say NI0 that'll cause people to flip out more than if you fly toward a bunch of pixels you rate as 0.844581 combatant

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      there's a line there buddy it's clearly saying NIQ

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    isn't x86 basically just risc with a massive decoder at this point anyway?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes. It's a non-issue and fixing it would cause more problems than it solves.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That actually makes it more of an issue. Allegedly Intel has already had internal talks about not changing their architecture any more than normal but changing the ISA which is basically just an API with modern instruction decoders and icache but they haven't done it yet since it would take a lot of die space to have two decoders and if they got rid of the old one proprietary software would break. Oh well. We're stuck with bad decisions from the 80s until we die.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Why are "they" trying to kill x86?
          It tells you in the third paragraph:
          >So here we are today, with even the highest-end x86 CPUs still supporting the archaic 8086 real mode, where the CPU can address memory directly, without any redirection.

          Everything that "they" are saying these days is all about inserting a new layer between you and memory access.
          >Use memory safe languages like Rust and let the compiler handle memory for you!
          >x86 has direct memory access?! That needs to die!
          etc

          Maybe I should pick up FPGAs again. The world could do with some architecture diversity. Big Tech likes diversity, right?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Interesting. So more vault7 glowie shit, huh? Is that why apple's ARM macbooks couldn't run any kind of software when a certain server went offline a few years ago?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          This article isn't really about the ISA bloat, it's about 16-bit real mode which is already basically a non-issue in a UEFI world and Intel is already removing completely with x86 S.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Isn't this what DOSBOX is for though?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes. The few very old legacy applications that were built for real mode x86 can run fine in DOSBOX, and don't suffer significant performance penalties since they were built for much slower CPUs in the first place.

            Meanwhile legacy x86 applications that were slightly newer may be a problem for emulation on non-x86 platforms. You're not going to play modern Windows games on ARM, and most corporations running legacy software are not going to buy ARM machines and test the waters on whether their old applications are going to break.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      By that logic cisc cpus never existed, since micro-code is risc like, and pretty much all "cisc" cpus were microcoded.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      more so, digital computers are just bunch of small rocks dancing to the tune of a shaman on a fire

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's more like CISC -> RISC -> VLIW
      x86 -> uOPs -> uOP fusion -> execution ports

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    where is it

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      dark part inside the jaw

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Where is it?

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Chang might be trying to kill it, but it's going nowhere

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    T900 jaw SUS

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      that's a stretch

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Since it is the oldest there are implementations of it without any spyware/backdoors, remember that there are guides for circumventing IME and chipset based backdoors embedded on HP/Dell/Lenovo/Foxconn motherboards. Real cybercriminals have little interest hacking non military/corporate networks and computers, the old tech they tell you to avoid using has flaws, but also ways to remove hardware telemetry/fingerprint ing.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There has been more money in ARM implementations among all the companies involved than x64 for a long time. AMD and Intel are small companies compared to all the big ARM implementers (Apple, Nvidia, Amazon). Hell even Qualcomm is bigger than Intel.
    But it won't really become cheaper than Intel/AMD until everyone and their grandmother can license a high performance core from ARM itself. Then someone would finally be willing to invest in catering to the small DIY crowd.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Intel is much bigger than you think it is. They have 125,000 employees to Qualcomm's 50k. Nvidia only has 30k, and AMD has 26k. Even Apple barely has more than Intel, and they have to design entire OSes while Intel works only on silicon.

      And inb4 "why is intel so bad if they have more employees" it's because they build their own chips instead of selling out to TSMC.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    x86 provides one consistent platform to run an OS on, through UEFI, ACPI, etc. This is what allows linux to run on all x86 computers without modification.

    they want to kill it and replace it with ARM so that the layout of each individual device is completely different (which is why porting linux to smartphones is such a ballache and barely ever works), thus killing linux and forcing you to use the OS shipped with the device.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Kill x86 and and it takes the open bootloaders with it.

      this.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >layout of each individual device is completely different
      What's this called? I didn't know there were differences like this. Are there any Linux projects where I can see a couple concrete examples of that? You just blew my fricking mind anon.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        proprietary. Ever notice how you can't run any android rom on every device? It's because of device drivers and the device tree blob overlay (a map of what's where, and how it runs) also bootloaders and firmware. None of it is open source and almost always customized, sometimes even on a per batch basis.
        I hate android and the fact that I don't have a viable alternative. I'd make my own rom if I knew how, shit I'd port postmarket os to my phone if I could.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not OP but it's Device tree. Device Tree is a declarative hardware description allowing the operating system to initialize basically everything -- even down to how much RAM is available and CPU clock. Same device but with different components or wired differently need their own device tree. Problem is that there's device tree blobs that don't allow for extended hardware support, and even the DT source files don't solve ISA specific kernel forks that may or may not be on top of Android, and with proprietary/unmaintained driver code.

        ARM does allow for ACPI/UEFI (both just need a Little Endian CPU) with it's chips and a server ready certification, but not a whole lot of vendors are very excited about supporting such things. Windows on ARM and Windows Phone devices also support ACPI as well, but there's no guarantee that the vendor will provide anything that just won't work on anything but Windows.

        not much more?
        that's what riscv was and it still hasn't kept up with high-end x64 or ARM. clean slate is less important than throwing money at the problem

        RISCV barely has any physical hardware out there. Give it a break.

        proprietary. Ever notice how you can't run any android rom on every device? It's because of device drivers and the device tree blob overlay (a map of what's where, and how it runs) also bootloaders and firmware. None of it is open source and almost always customized, sometimes even on a per batch basis.
        I hate android and the fact that I don't have a viable alternative. I'd make my own rom if I knew how, shit I'd port postmarket os to my phone if I could.

        For ARM devices, when there's a device tree, that is the firmware. There is nothing else that's at play, aside from maybe driver blobs, that can be considered firmware.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Hee hee le n-wore funny

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Funny when it triggers pansies

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        like yourself and your feminine giggle response?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      dumb tourist

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      correct

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kill x86 and and it takes the open bootloaders with it.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why are "they" trying to kill x86?
    Probably same reason I want to get rid of all the SoC's in phones and also x86_64. There needs to be one standard platform. I vote for x86_512 vbis. All of the people that work on these standards must be locked in a room to they sort out one single standard.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >it's happening
    TWO FRICKING MONTHS

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is laughably ambitious. They can't force abandonware to port over to ARM, so it's 100% going to use a translation layer that any anticheat is going to catch. There's going to be a lot of problems with ARM transition on Windows for a long time.

      Reminder that M$ removed Space Cadet Pinball because it wasn't x64 ready. And yet... they kept paint and countless others.

      Pinball wasn't ready for Aero or DirectX. Wish they asked their contracted studio to remake it for Vista instead of more fricking puzzle games.

      Isn't this what DOSBOX is for though?

      Wouldn't doubt that there's some businesses out there with custom software made forever ago running on emulators replacing ancient out of production machines.

      Intel is much bigger than you think it is. They have 125,000 employees to Qualcomm's 50k. Nvidia only has 30k, and AMD has 26k. Even Apple barely has more than Intel, and they have to design entire OSes while Intel works only on silicon.

      And inb4 "why is intel so bad if they have more employees" it's because they build their own chips instead of selling out to TSMC.

      Remember Intel is kind of two companies in a single banner. Intel that develops the chips etc, and Intel the foundry. That foundry part bloats up the employee count above the likes of fabless chip firms like AMD or Qualcomm.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Why are "they" trying to kill x86?
    Because they want you on the architecture that has a build in GSM modem.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I LOVE proprietary tech!
    risc-v is the future

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Reminder that M$ removed Space Cadet Pinball because it wasn't x64 ready. And yet... they kept paint and countless others.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://alula.github.io/SpaceCadetPinball

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Microsoft did not write pinball, it was some third party spaghetti code they licenced.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine how powerful we could make computers with a new clean-slate.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not much more?
      that's what riscv was and it still hasn't kept up with high-end x64 or ARM. clean slate is less important than throwing money at the problem

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >laptop is stuck on Mint 19.3 because that's the last 32-bit release
    they just want to make old tech obsolete because it has less or no backdoors in the chips

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why not switch to a distro that still supports i686?

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they're trying to break backwards compatibility and wintel duopoly, that way you'll be forced to buy updates every year

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it's kinda crazy that even risc machines have microps and microop fusion these days
    but I guess PowerPC has been doing it forever

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Bruh no way he's gonna say Black person that's mad funny yo fr fr

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *