Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes (Score 1) 88

The long game is that they are not going to bet their whole existence on their being able to keep ahead of the performance curve.

Says you. Their actions say otherwise.

They will be testing the Atoms and if the Atoms happen to produce a better power and performance package, you can bet that they will flip over to Intel.

People claimed that regarding the iPad for years and years and years. And yet Apple continues to not care about Intel's mobile chips. While in the universe of all possible things is clearly a possibility, it is highly improbable based on their actions.

Comment: Re:Quite a weak X3 line ... cost determines succes (Score 1) 88

Apple plays the long game.

Yes, the "long game" being that they want to use their own custom chips.

Their entire mobile product line relies on ARM chips they develop (Remember who's shipped the first 64 bit arm cpu in a production product when no one else was even sampling one?) Of course they're going to continue to develop Arm in the near term.

Why would they be spending hundreds of millions on acquistions and billions on R&D for their custom chips just to throw all that away for some Intel chip that has yet to appear? Apple has already long since proved that they don't need Intel in either the iPhone or iPad.

Keeping a quiet team working on an intel port of iOS would cost next to nothing in comparison and would reap HUGE benefits if Intel manages to upset the market. They would, frankly, be stupid not to.

iOS already runs on x86(_64). It's called the "iOS Simulator" (previously the iPhone Simulator). There isn't any need for a "quiet team" since it's all out in the public and has been part of the iOS SDK for going on 6 years.

Comment: Re:Someone building iOS on x86 ... (Score 1) 88

So yes, someone is probably building and testing iOS on x86 but it has little to nothing to do with any plans regarding using x86 on any devices. Sort of similar to the Microsoft's efforts to internally build and test Windows on a non-x86 platform after it gave up on shipping MIPS, PowerPC and Alpha binaries. Its more about testing and future proofing a core asset than any short term plans.

Yeah, this isn't something surprising nor some secretive thing. You do realize that the iOS simulator runs x86(_64) compiled code, right? That's how it's always worked.

Comment: Re:Terrorists (Score 2) 269

by Lunix Nutcase (#49131681) Attached to: It's Official: NSA Spying Is Hurting the US Tech Economy

Yeah bad shit like the Clipper chip was being done under Clinton's watch and I never claimed that the only times civil liberties were shredded was during Dubya. But the "THE TERRISTS!!!" bullshit line to hyperdrive surveillance powers and shred liberties was done during Dubya's reign with the passing of the Patriot Act. But he is not the only one responsible for the reprehensible bill as there were plenty of Democrats supporting it.

Comment: Re:Terrorists (Score 2) 269

by Lunix Nutcase (#49131637) Attached to: It's Official: NSA Spying Is Hurting the US Tech Economy

You're the one who dragged "Dubya" into this and tried to lay it at his feet.

I didn't lay anything at his feet beyond what he himself did. Which is that he and the Democratic-controlled Senate were complicit in shredding civil liberties after 9/11. I'm sorry that saying anything bad about Dubya makes you such a flailing tard. Not my fault that you're such a partisan twit.

Gotta love how the "BOOOSH lied, people died!" fools shut the hell up when confronted with "If you like your plan, you can keep it" or "If you like your doctor you can keep him" or "No more illegal wiretapping of American citizens" or "no more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime" or "no more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war" or, wonder of wonders, "NO MORE IGNORING THE LAW WHEN IT IS INCONVENIENT", like, say Obamacare deadlines or immigration laws...

I don't see how any of that applies to me since I don't and never did vote or support Dubya's or Obama's stances on surveillance. But that doesn't change the fact that Dubya is the president who signed the Patriot Act into law that provided the very powers that Obama abuses and extends.

Comment: Re:Terrorists (Score 2, Informative) 269

by Lunix Nutcase (#49131313) Attached to: It's Official: NSA Spying Is Hurting the US Tech Economy

I hate to take the side of the frothing tard that the GP is, but the Democrats had 50-49 majority control of the Senate when the Patriot Act was voted on. It wasn't 51-49 because of the 1 seat being vacant due to Paul Wellstone dying the day the Patriot Act vote happened in the Senate.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (7) Well, it's an excellent idea, but it would make the compilers too hard to write.