Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #24644 > unrolled thread

ARM about to be sold

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded

Contents

  ARM about to be sold Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2016-07-18 12:15 +0000
    Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 11:01 -0400
      Re: ARM about to be sold Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@highlandtechnology.invalid> - 2016-07-18 16:44 +0000
        Re: ARM about to be sold "tim..." <tims_new_home@yahoo.com> - 2016-07-18 17:53 +0100
          Re: ARM about to be sold "Bill Davy" <Bill@SynectixLtd.com> - 2016-07-19 12:06 +0100
      Re: ARM about to be sold Mike Perkins <spam@spam.com> - 2016-07-18 19:25 +0100
      Re: ARM about to be sold Nils M Holm <nmh@ananda.local> - 2016-07-18 19:10 +0000
        Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-18 17:58 -0400
      Re: ARM about to be sold Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2016-07-18 22:50 -0500
        Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 03:13 -0400
          Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-19 10:23 +0300
            Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-19 10:26 -0400
              Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-19 17:35 +0300
            Re: ARM about to be sold Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-07-26 10:57 -0500
              Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 13:23 -0400
                Re: ARM about to be sold Evgeny Filatov <filatov.ev@mipt.ru> - 2016-07-26 20:39 +0300
                  Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 13:49 -0400
                  Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-26 20:51 +0300
                    Re: ARM about to be sold Evgeny Filatov <filatov.ev@mipt.ru> - 2016-07-26 21:08 +0300
                      Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-26 22:57 +0300
                Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-26 20:56 +0300
                Re: ARM about to be sold Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-07-26 13:45 -0500
                  Re: ARM about to be sold Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2016-07-27 03:45 +0300
                    Re: ARM about to be sold Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-07-27 11:26 -0500
                      Re: ARM about to be sold lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com - 2016-07-27 15:00 -0700
                        Re: ARM about to be sold Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-07-28 01:46 -0500
                    Re: ARM about to be sold Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2016-07-28 17:39 +0000
                  Re: ARM about to be sold rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-07-26 18:13 -0400
      Re: ARM about to be sold Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-07-26 10:49 -0500
    Re: ARM about to be sold Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-18 08:20 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#24720

On 26.7.2016 г. 20:23, rickman wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether ARM's
>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>> mess
>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the initial
>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>> is no
>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make billions
>>> is not stupid - true.
>>
>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>> talent at all.
>
> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> be doing it, no?

I suppose it takes at least being a lot more pushy than average - and
somewhat smarter than average, pushy and average is just pathetic :-).

Now I don't claim I know what it takes of course, this just looks like
some bare minimum at first thought.

Dimiter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24722

rickman wrote:
> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether ARM's
>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>> mess
>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the initial
>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>> is no
>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make billions
>>> is not stupid - true.
>>
>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>> talent at all.
>
> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> be doing it, no?
>
>

Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
and wealth beyond a certain basic level.

Really rich people treat a certain insouciance about the facts of
reality as a luxury good. There is a thing called "rational ignorance"
and they use it.

Any billionaire alive has a long history of business dumpster fires;
(s)he just happened to luck into either fewer of them or a suite of them
that were less severe. Or they bought the right land at the right price 
at the right time.

I'll make an exception for people like Micheal Burry ( the "hero" of
"The Big Short" because he's an Aspie and just did the heavy lifting.

>>> Not being stupid is by far not what it takes to do what ARM did so far
>>> though. It takes some extra talent.
>>>
>>
>> But this too. Smart people do stupid things.
>
> But less often than stupid people.
>
>

Intelligence is like four-wheel drive - it just gets you stuck in deeper
mud.

>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>
>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>> it),
>>
>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>>
>> I dunno - is a Coretex A8 on a Beaglebone a large or small? Seems large
>> to me. Maybe medium?
>>
>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>
>>
>> It may not.
>
> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>

ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
(aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24725

On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the
>>>>>> initial
>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>> is no
>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>> billions
>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>
>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>> talent at all.
>>
>> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>> be doing it, no?
>>
>>
>
> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.

Of course so.
But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.

>
>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>
>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>> it),
>>>
>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.

Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
low power applications where processing speed is not too important
(still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
initially anyway I guess).


>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may not.
>>
>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>
>
> ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
> (aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
> don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.
>

I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
where will the savings come from.

Dimiter

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24732

Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
>> rickman wrote:
>>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the
>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
>>>>>>> holding an
>>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>>> is no
>>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>>> billions
>>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>>
>>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>>> talent at all.
>>>
>>> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
>>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>>> be doing it, no?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
>> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
>
> Of course so.
> But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
> not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
> This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
>


Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.

>>
>>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>>> it),
>>>>
>>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>
> Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
> it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
> low power applications where processing speed is not too important
> (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
> initially anyway I guess).
>

There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
concentrator solves a lot of problems.

>
>>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It may not.
>>>
>>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>>
>>
>> ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
>> (aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
>> don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.
>>
>
> I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
> power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
> it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
> where will the savings come from.
>

Agreed, but PPC is not exactly flourishing.

> Dimiter
>
>
-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24735

Den onsdag den 27. juli 2016 kl. 18.21.27 UTC+2 skrev Les Cargill:
> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> > On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
> >> rickman wrote:
> >>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
> >>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> >>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
> >>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
> >>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
> >>>>>>>>> bring
> >>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
> >>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
> >>>>>>>>> ARM's
> >>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
> >>>>>>>>> quality staff.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
> >>>>>>>> mess
> >>>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
> >>>>>>> splendidly,
> >>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the
> >>>>>>> initial
> >>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
> >>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
> >>>>>>> holding an
> >>>>>>> empty bag.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
> >>>>>> is no
> >>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
> >>>>> billions
> >>>>> is not stupid - true.
> >>>>
> >>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
> >>>> talent at all.
> >>>
> >>> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
> >>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
> >>> be doing it, no?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
> >> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
> >
> > Of course so.
> > But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
> > not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
> > This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
> >
> 
> 
> Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.
> 
> >>
> >>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
> >>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
> >>>>> it),
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
> >
> > Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
> > it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
> > low power applications where processing speed is not too important
> > (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
> > initially anyway I guess).
> >
> 
> There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
> with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
> hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
> concentrator solves a lot of problems.
> 

the BBBlack has 2 extra 200MHz cpus for real time things, though I have 
no idea how well it works

https://www.embeddedrelated.com/showarticle/586.php

-Lasse

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24741

lasselangwadtchristensen@gmail.com wrote:
> Den onsdag den 27. juli 2016 kl. 18.21.27 UTC+2 skrev Les Cargill:
>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>> On 26.7.2016 г. 21:45, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>> rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>>>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the
>>>>>>>>> initial
>>>>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders
>>>>>>>>> holding an
>>>>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>>>>> is no
>>>>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>>>>> billions
>>>>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>>>>> talent at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
>>>>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>>>>> be doing it, no?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
>>>> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
>>>
>>> Of course so.
>>> But I think the claim was about the first derivative :-). I.e. it is
>>> not about being wealthy, it is about getting there from say average.
>>> This takes some basic prerequisites and of course loads of luck.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Just being basically wealthy just takes sustained effort. Luck helps a lot.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>>>>> it),
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>>>
>>> Yes but its register model and being a load/store machine just mean
>>> it cannot maintain a full pipeline of reasonable size. So it is OK for
>>> low power applications where processing speed is not too important
>>> (still a huge market, the "low power" got them into the phone market
>>> initially anyway I guess).
>>>
>>
>> There is a whale of a lot (in the soft-realtime space ) you can do
>> with RasPi/BBBlack class boards. I've yet to face trying to make one do
>> hard realtime, but a tiered architecture with one of these as a comms
>> concentrator solves a lot of problems.
>>
>
> the BBBlack has 2 extra 200MHz cpus for real time things, though I have
> no idea how well it works
>

Yeah; the PRU(s). People use them it would seem. It's a bit daunting.
I haven't yet. I'd have to, you know, buy one. :)

> https://www.embeddedrelated.com/showarticle/586.php
>
> -Lasse
>
>
>

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24753

On 2016-07-26, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know if ARM64 brings anything which 64 bit power does not. Lower
> power - not so sure about that though I have never looked into it, if
> it is a pipelined 64 bit machine with all the registers and MMU etc.
> where will the savings come from.
>

ARM64 brings along a company which knows how to build an ecosystem for
today's hobbyists in the hope that they might become tomorrow's buyers
and product recommendation experts.

That's an attribute totally missing from the Power world; I know as
I looked for some low cost boards suitable for hobbyists a few years
ago and found nothing.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24726

On 7/26/2016 2:45 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>> On 7/26/2016 11:57 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
>>> Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
>>>> On 19.7.2016 г. 10:13, rickman wrote:
>>>>> On 7/18/2016 11:50 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:01:40 -0400, rickman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>>>>> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a Brit, it saddens me to see a British success story sold into
>>>>>>>> foreign hands, but my real concern is about what the future might
>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>> several years down the road.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I read they expect to double the UK workforce, so not all bad.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Questions currently going through my mind include whether ARM will
>>>>>>>> still be able to perform R&D at their current rate and whether
>>>>>>>> ARM's
>>>>>>>> engineers will be outsourced in the future and replaced with lower
>>>>>>>> quality staff.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then
>>>>>>> mess
>>>>>>> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> History disagrees with you.  Sometimes these things work out
>>>>>> splendidly,
>>>>>> sometimes they work horribly.  Usually the people who make the
>>>>>> initial
>>>>>> deal make out like bandits ('cuz they're not stupid), but often the
>>>>>> companies involved go down the tubes, leaving stockholders holding an
>>>>>> empty bag.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your logic is very poor.  History says things can go bad, but that
>>>>> is no
>>>>> contradiction to what I said.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your logic is not very good either though. Anybody who can make
>>>> billions
>>>> is not stupid - true.
>>>
>>> Just no. Making billions doesn't imply any sort of intelligence nor
>>> talent at all.
>>
>> Are you talking about winning the lottery?  Otherwise making billions of
>> dollars pretty much does require *some* sort of talent or everyone would
>> be doing it, no?
>>
>>
>
> Trust me; there is nearly no correlation between actual intelligence
> and wealth beyond a certain basic level.
>
> Really rich people treat a certain insouciance about the facts of
> reality as a luxury good. There is a thing called "rational ignorance"
> and they use it.
>
> Any billionaire alive has a long history of business dumpster fires;
> (s)he just happened to luck into either fewer of them or a suite of them
> that were less severe. Or they bought the right land at the right price
> at the right time.
>
> I'll make an exception for people like Micheal Burry ( the "hero" of
> "The Big Short" because he's an Aspie and just did the heavy lifting.
>
>>>> Not being stupid is by far not what it takes to do what ARM did so far
>>>> though. It takes some extra talent.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But this too. Smart people do stupid things.
>>
>> But less often than stupid people.
>>
>>
>
> Intelligence is like four-wheel drive - it just gets you stuck in deeper
> mud.

This statement makes your previous comments much more clear.


>>>> You don't know whether the guy with the billions has it.
>>>>
>>>> I expect things will slowly fall into their places, ARM 32 will stay
>>>> in small MCU-s (it is just not fit for use in large ones as they use
>>>> it),
>>>
>>> I'm behind as well, but ARM32 can support quite a bit of RAM and FLASH.
>>>
>>> I dunno - is a Coretex A8 on a Beaglebone a large or small? Seems large
>>> to me. Maybe medium?
>>>
>>>> ARM 64 may or may not survive, time will tell (I don't know enough
>>>> about it to make predictions).
>>>>
>>>
>>> It may not.
>>
>> In the long run nothing survives including us.
>>
>
> ARM64 should have quite a market for it. This assuming that smartphones
> (aka "computers for people who don't want or need a computer" )
> don't just eat the entirety of all electronics markets.

-- 

Rick C

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24711

rickman wrote:
> On 7/18/2016 8:15 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
<snip>
>
> I doubt it.  Would you pay billions for a working company and then mess
> it up?  Anyone who can raise billions is not stupid.
>
>

There's little reporting on the phenomenon, but acquisitions in the
billions (1xE09) range are routinely bollixed up.

My experience is that the people who can raise billions are not
the sharpest tools in the shed. It's not called "dumb money" for
nothing.

-- 
Les Cargill

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#24646

Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
> ARM is about to be sold to a Japanese company:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36822806

There is some informative discussion here, though it's a day old by now:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12112850

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded

csiph-web