| 1 |
> > It seems like ARM processors will destroy x86 before too long. Does |
| 2 |
> > anyone think this won't happen? |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > - Grant |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Yes me. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> ARM will take over where it makes sense and won't where it doesn't. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> For desktops and laptops, x86 was used simply because there was nothing |
| 11 |
> else, so x86 is going to have to fight for it's survival in the |
| 12 |
> whole bottom and middle range there. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> x86 has already lost the fight in the portable market (phones, tablets) |
| 15 |
> and truth be told never really got going there. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> For everything else, I don't see ARM making much inroads. There's a hug |
| 18 |
> server market out there for things with computing grunt and the |
| 19 |
> software that drives them - x86 isn't going away in that market anytime |
| 20 |
> soon. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> But this is an old, old, old argument. People predicted the demise of |
| 23 |
> mainframes for years when x86 started becoming a quite powerful cpu. |
| 24 |
> The current truth is that IBM sell more mainframes year on year, growth |
| 25 |
> is more than mere inflation can account for, and mainframes are just |
| 26 |
> getting stronger. So x86 didn't kill the mainframe, instead x86 played |
| 27 |
> a huge role in making both stronger. I see no reason to believe the |
| 28 |
> same story won't play out exactly the same all over again between x86 |
| 29 |
> and ARM. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
This is really interesting. "all over again" is exactly what I expect to |
| 32 |
happen, but I didn't realize it happened as you say. A friend of mine was |
| 33 |
really into SPARC in the 90's and complained loudly when x86 grabbed its |
| 34 |
market share. At least that was how I understood it. I imagine the same |
| 35 |
thing happening with ARM and x86, but maybe I'm jumping to conclusions? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
- Grant |
Archives