Return to the archive index

Re: Crusoe versus StrongArm, Super H, etc.

From: kjw@puma.engr.sgi.com (Kevin Wang)
Date: Fri Jan 21 20:54:54 2000
Newsgroups: comp.sys.wearables

 From: Neill Newman <njnewm@essex.ac.uk>
>> 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 ;)

nope.  For example, Windows NT used to run on Intel, MIPS, and Alpha,
but MIPS was dropped several years ago and Alpha is barely hanging in
there.

The real problem is hardware peripherals.  USB may change this picture
in the near future for external peripherals, but internal peripherals
need to be compatible.  Who wants to buy a custom Harddisk Interface,
just because it's more power saving?  Nobody.

You have to be able to interface with standard ISA, PCI busses, RAM,
and other internal peripherals, and even that's not a guarantee that
you might succeed - strongarm does have pcmcia, but that's not an
economical expansion path.

The real Crusoe win is the Intel compatability.

Remember how painful it was just to recompile 8 bit to 16 bit under
Windows?  How long did that take?  How much effort is needed to do all
of this porting? a hell of a lot.

So... Crusoe looks promising, but the specs have yet to be reviewed,
and actual products have yet to be announced.

   - Kevin

Return to archive index | Next message in thread


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

Archive created with babymail