Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #680118 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-12-13 19:35 -0500 |
| Last post | 2024-12-14 13:01 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 131 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 19:35 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 00:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-13 20:05 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 06:06 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 01:18 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 08:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 08:23 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-15 07:07 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 10:23 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 07:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 15:44 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 12:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-15 07:23 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 10:12 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:27 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 10:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:13 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 08:57 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:30 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 18:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-18 06:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 08:50 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-19 02:04 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 08:45 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-19 19:53 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 14:34 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 17:15 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 18:28 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 20:08 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-20 01:16 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:37 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:31 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:42 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-19 21:03 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:56 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:58 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:28 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:39 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:39 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 13:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:45 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-21 09:45 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2024-12-20 20:37 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 16:51 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2024-12-20 21:57 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 17:43 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 07:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-21 07:25 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-21 22:42 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-21 18:19 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-21 18:26 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-22 00:24 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 07:12 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 06:31 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 11:56 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 09:49 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 13:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-27 17:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2024-12-21 18:46 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-22 05:41 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 07:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-23 06:44 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 11:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-22 09:24 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-22 11:19 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-23 06:18 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-23 12:03 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-23 19:14 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> - 2024-12-27 17:16 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-29 11:08 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-20 01:19 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:54 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:55 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 17:14 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:09 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:09 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:03 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 09:00 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:52 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:54 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 18:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 19:36 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:05 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 09:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 19:58 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-17 20:22 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:05 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:06 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-19 08:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-20 05:51 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-20 08:53 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 19:43 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 20:01 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:02 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 20:00 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-14 20:04 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 08:47 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-14 22:16 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 08:49 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-12-15 22:24 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-15 20:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:29 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 11:02 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:19 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 09:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:59 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-17 20:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:03 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-18 20:17 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 05:33 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 07:57 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 07:47 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2024-12-19 20:01 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 Physfitfreak <physfitfreak@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 01:53 -0600
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> - 2024-12-20 09:29 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-16 10:28 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-16 11:01 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 08:15 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 08:59 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-17 20:45 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-17 18:03 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-18 11:20 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 09:20 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2024-12-18 16:27 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-18 19:46 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> - 2024-12-20 01:35 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-19 08:06 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 07:51 -0500
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2024-12-14 15:58 +0000
Re: Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2024-12-14 13:01 -0500
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 19:35 -0500 |
| Subject | Intel's co-CEO claims retailers say Qualcomm-powered PCs have high return rates, points to new competitors with Arm chips coming in 2025 |
| Message-ID | <hikplj9384rou0rmr2f8c6pmr0e09pcsi5@4ax.com> |
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-interim-co-ceo-claims-retailers-are-concerned-by-return-rate-of-qualcomm-powered-machines Bottom line, people are having an issue with familiarity, returning a Windows ARM device. It didn't operate quite the same way. Duh, it's a good thing, it's superior tech for a laptop. Don't just return it. -- Joel W. Crump Amendment XIV Section 1. [...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 00:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ls42suFfeshU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #680118 |
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:35:05 -0500, Joel wrote: > https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-interim-co-ceo- claims-retailers-are-concerned-by-return-rate-of-qualcomm-powered-machines > > > Bottom line, people are having an issue with familiarity, returning a > Windows ARM device. It didn't operate quite the same way. Duh, it's a > good thing, it's superior tech for a laptop. Don't just return it. "Compatibility issues are, of course, thought to be the primary reason why people return Snapdragon X-based systems to retailers." RT redux. Hopefully the same vicious cycle won't repeat. Consumers: "This thing won't run my favorite Windows app. I'm taking it back!" Developers: "Those things aren't selling. We're not going to waste time writing native Arm apps." Industry Rags: "Low sales suggests another Microsoft flop. Share price delining."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-13 20:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ndmpljh9c3nljm6qltc2kelgs06u4f94ng@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #680119 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:35:05 -0500, Joel wrote: > >> https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-interim-co-ceo- >claims-retailers-are-concerned-by-return-rate-of-qualcomm-powered-machines >> >> >> Bottom line, people are having an issue with familiarity, returning a >> Windows ARM device. It didn't operate quite the same way. Duh, it's a >> good thing, it's superior tech for a laptop. Don't just return it. > >"Compatibility issues are, of course, thought to be the primary reason why >people return Snapdragon X-based systems to retailers." > >RT redux. Hopefully the same vicious cycle won't repeat. > >Consumers: >"This thing won't run my favorite Windows app. I'm taking it back!" > >Developers: >"Those things aren't selling. We're not going to waste time writing native >Arm apps." > >Industry Rags: >"Low sales suggests another Microsoft flop. Share price delining." Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize the benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and forgotten. -- Joel W. Crump Amendment XIV Section 1. [...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 06:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ls4ljkFig06U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #680120 |
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 20:05:47 -0500, Joel wrote: > Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize the > benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and > forgotten. Lenovo is claiming a 28 hour battery life. Is that a truly compelling reason to go with ARM? Battery life has always been featured in laptop reviews but they have to write about something. It's like a long article about why the 2025 Toyota is so much better than the 2024 Toyota. I may not be the typical laptop user. I can't remember when the two next to me were unplugged other than the 6 day power outage in July. Sure, I see people using laptops in the library but the new library had outlets all over the place as does my favorite espresso place. People have developed laptop usage patterns over the last 25 years or so. Maybe ARM will succeed this time. Microsoft has tried to chase Apple before with limited success. Apple was a little cagier too. 'Apple Silicon' is a nice buzzword that doesn't suggest a new architecture to the plebes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 01:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <6n8qlj14cnj0i56tu6o16l89miebd7dvkf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #680133 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >> Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize the >> benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and >> forgotten. > >Lenovo is claiming a 28 hour battery life. Is that a truly compelling >reason to go with ARM? Battery life has always been featured in laptop >reviews but they have to write about something. It's like a long article >about why the 2025 Toyota is so much better than the 2024 Toyota. > >I may not be the typical laptop user. I can't remember when the two next >to me were unplugged other than the 6 day power outage in July. Sure, I >see people using laptops in the library but the new library had outlets >all over the place as does my favorite espresso place. > >People have developed laptop usage patterns over the last 25 years or so. >Maybe ARM will succeed this time. Microsoft has tried to chase Apple >before with limited success. Apple was a little cagier too. 'Apple >Silicon' is a nice buzzword that doesn't suggest a new architecture to the >plebes. I believe that the software will follow the new hardware. -- Joel W. Crump Amendment XIV Section 1. [...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 08:27 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lJf7P.2572$qu83.402@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #680134 |
Le 2024-12-14 à 01:18, Joel a écrit : > rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >>> Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize the >>> benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and >>> forgotten. >> >> Lenovo is claiming a 28 hour battery life. Is that a truly compelling >> reason to go with ARM? Battery life has always been featured in laptop >> reviews but they have to write about something. It's like a long article >> about why the 2025 Toyota is so much better than the 2024 Toyota. >> >> I may not be the typical laptop user. I can't remember when the two next >> to me were unplugged other than the 6 day power outage in July. Sure, I >> see people using laptops in the library but the new library had outlets >> all over the place as does my favorite espresso place. >> >> People have developed laptop usage patterns over the last 25 years or so. >> Maybe ARM will succeed this time. Microsoft has tried to chase Apple >> before with limited success. Apple was a little cagier too. 'Apple >> Silicon' is a nice buzzword that doesn't suggest a new architecture to the >> plebes. > > > I believe that the software will follow the new hardware. I hope you're right. Microsoft has a way of fucking incredibly simple things up. Apple is already offering what Microsoft is promising so if using ARM is that important, people should go that route. Considering Microsoft's spotty history when it comes to transitions of any kind, I would expect them to abandon ARM entirely if computer using that architecture don't set the world on fire in their first year of availability. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 08:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <gFf7P.2571$qu83.702@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #680133 |
Le 2024-12-14 à 01:06, rbowman a écrit : > On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 20:05:47 -0500, Joel wrote: > >> Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize the >> benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and >> forgotten. > > Lenovo is claiming a 28 hour battery life. Is that a truly compelling > reason to go with ARM? Battery life has always been featured in laptop > reviews but they have to write about something. It's like a long article > about why the 2025 Toyota is so much better than the 2024 Toyota. > > I may not be the typical laptop user. I can't remember when the two next > to me were unplugged other than the 6 day power outage in July. Sure, I > see people using laptops in the library but the new library had outlets > all over the place as does my favorite espresso place. > > People have developed laptop usage patterns over the last 25 years or so. > Maybe ARM will succeed this time. Microsoft has tried to chase Apple > before with limited success. Apple was a little cagier too. 'Apple > Silicon' is a nice buzzword that doesn't suggest a new architecture to the > plebes. People probably don't need 24-hour battery life, but they will be thrilled to have it either way. My gaming laptop boasted of ten-hour battery life when I got it and it can definitely do that if you don't use the horrible software ASUS provides you by default. I usually have a power outlet near wherever I use the computer, but I didn't have one as I was correcting yesterday and needed to look at the students' workbook on the screen all the while entering grades. I was hoping that I'd have enough juice to last the three hours I was there. In the end, I used about 25% battery in viewing the original book on screen and listening to a local radio station which talked about the Canadiens's horrible loss the night before. In other words, decent battery life not only allowed me to get the job done but to enjoy myself while doing boring work. However, notice that I was apprehensive about the laptop having enough battery life for the task despite knowing that it can usually handle ten hours without issue. My habit of keeping the machine plugged makes me fear not having the adapter around. Meanwhile, when I had a MacBook Air M1, I was so used to not having an adapter around that I wouldn't have feared not having enough battery life. Once you experience the latter, you get addicted to it and don't want to return to a life where you feel it necessary to lug around anything other than the laptop itself. The battery life of machines is indeed going to be a major selling point in the very near future. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-15 07:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vjmgq0$igk3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680159 |
On 12/14/24 8:23 AM, CrudeSausage wrote: > ... > People probably don't need 24-hour battery life, but they will be > thrilled to have it either way. My gaming laptop boasted of ten-hour > battery life when I got it and it can definitely do that if you don't > use the horrible software ASUS provides you by default... My take is that a "long hours" laptop life needs to not be BS in order to actually be of benefit. I can recall getting a new Thinkpad at work at one point which bragged about 8 hours ... and when just running MS-Office stuff, reality was more like 2.5 hours. > However, notice that I was apprehensive about the laptop having enough > battery life for the task despite knowing that it can usually handle ten > hours without issue. My habit of keeping the machine plugged makes me > fear not having the adapter around. Meanwhile, when I had a MacBook Air > M1, I was so used to not having an adapter around that I wouldn't have > feared not having enough battery life. Once you experience the latter, > you get addicted to it and don't want to return to a life where you feel > it necessary to lug around anything other than the laptop itself. The > battery life of machines is indeed going to be a major selling point in > the very near future. Agreed. Apple's M hardware machines are already there. Its now up to the WinTel world to catch up... ...and for Linux too, if they've not done a good job porting their OS & Apps to the Apple M architecture. -hh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-15 10:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vvC7P.3815$qu83.1353@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #680303 |
Le 2024-12-15 à 07:07, -hh a écrit : > On 12/14/24 8:23 AM, CrudeSausage wrote: >> ... >> People probably don't need 24-hour battery life, but they will be >> thrilled to have it either way. My gaming laptop boasted of ten-hour >> battery life when I got it and it can definitely do that if you don't >> use the horrible software ASUS provides you by default... > > > My take is that a "long hours" laptop life needs to not be BS in order > to actually be of benefit. I can recall getting a new Thinkpad at work > at one point which bragged about 8 hours ... and when just running MS- > Office stuff, reality was more like 2.5 hours. That's why I usually take claims made by PC manufacturers with a grain of salt. Even the ten hours claim made by ASUS for this machine didn't seem too believable. It is, after all, quite theoretical. However, if you allow the battery to charge to 100% and remove the software ASUS itself supplies with the machine, you can get a discharge of about 5.5 to 7.5mW on average on a battery which charges to 76,000mW. The battery will wear out fairly quickly though so that 76,000 number will turn to 74,000 to 72,000 to 67,000 to 60,000 very quickly. I imagine that if they adopted slow charging from 80% to 100% like Apple does, they could limit the wear though. >> However, notice that I was apprehensive about the laptop having enough >> battery life for the task despite knowing that it can usually handle >> ten hours without issue. My habit of keeping the machine plugged makes >> me fear not having the adapter around. Meanwhile, when I had a MacBook >> Air M1, I was so used to not having an adapter around that I wouldn't >> have feared not having enough battery life. Once you experience the >> latter, you get addicted to it and don't want to return to a life >> where you feel it necessary to lug around anything other than the >> laptop itself. The battery life of machines is indeed going to be a >> major selling point in the very near future. > > Agreed. Apple's M hardware machines are already there. Its now up to > the WinTel world to catch up... > > ...and for Linux too, if they've not done a good job porting their OS & > Apps to the Apple M architecture. I'd say it is unbelievable had Apple not already done it several times before. You can count on them to get things right because they excel across the board. They made the transition from 68000 to PowerPC seamless for most users. Similarly, they made the transition from 9.2.2 to OS X easy by having the old OS load in the background to run the aging apps on the new OS. Somehow, they even made the transition from PowerPC to Intel mostly transparent to users with only performance being an issue (to be expected). Clearly, when they decided to move to their own processors, people with a good knowledge of Apple's history could not help but be excited because there was no way they could screw it up and, frankly, they haven't. Even though I no longer have one (mostly out of a concern that the machine would die from the SSD wearing out), there is no doubt in my mind that the MacBook is a superior work machine than any PC I could buy because of its complete lack of distractions, its consistently stellar performance, its phenomenal battery life and its rock-solid stability. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 07:56 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4gf7P.5896$Uup4.1220@fx10.iad> |
| In reply to | #680120 |
Le 2024-12-13 à 20:05, Joel a écrit : > rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:35:05 -0500, Joel wrote: >> >>> https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-interim-co-ceo- >> claims-retailers-are-concerned-by-return-rate-of-qualcomm-powered-machines >>> >>> >>> Bottom line, people are having an issue with familiarity, returning a >>> Windows ARM device. It didn't operate quite the same way. Duh, it's a >>> good thing, it's superior tech for a laptop. Don't just return it. >> >> "Compatibility issues are, of course, thought to be the primary reason why >> people return Snapdragon X-based systems to retailers." >> >> RT redux. Hopefully the same vicious cycle won't repeat. >> >> Consumers: >> "This thing won't run my favorite Windows app. I'm taking it back!" >> >> Developers: >> "Those things aren't selling. We're not going to waste time writing native >> Arm apps." >> >> Industry Rags: >> "Low sales suggests another Microsoft flop. Share price delining." > > > Lol, yeah, this is just growing pains. Once people actually realize > the benefit of ARM for a laptop, this trend will seem meaningless and > forgotten. Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 15:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjk95h$28k0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680148 |
On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > > Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore > improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, > people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work > on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-14 12:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rEj7P.2573$qu83.2465@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #680185 |
Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> >> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. > > While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I > really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-15 07:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjm05a$fm6k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680208 |
On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> >>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >> >> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. > > Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. > However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe > where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same > way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their > reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to > energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn to live without computers at all. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-15 10:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ilC7P.2844$vfee.1442@fx45.iad> |
| In reply to | #680294 |
Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> >>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>> >>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >> >> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. > > If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn > to live without computers at all. If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-16 10:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjova6$134en$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680325 |
On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>> >>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>> >>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >> >> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >> to live without computers at all. > > If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that > either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer > which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how > popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing > miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most > likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by > Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their > energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop is that big of a concern, even in Europe. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-16 10:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <c7Y7P.71530$oR74.29957@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #680470 |
Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>>> >>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>>> >>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >>> >>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >>> to live without computers at all. >> >> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that >> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer >> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how >> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing >> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most >> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by >> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their >> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. > > I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop > is that big of a concern, even in Europe. In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking, specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia. You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of power to play a game every hour. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-17 08:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjrbqo$1l8iu$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680487 |
On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit : >> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>>>> >>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>>>> >>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >>>> >>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >>>> to live without computers at all. >>> >>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that >>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer >>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how >>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing >>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most >>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by >>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their >>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. >> >> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop >> is that big of a concern, even in Europe. > > In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking, > specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia. > You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical > production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much > higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as > they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of > power to play a game every hour. I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news). I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the amount of electricity required to charge a laptop. I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD CPU). And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.) -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-17 08:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rrf8P.12967$DPl.11267@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #680560 |
Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >>>>> >>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >>>>> to live without computers at all. >>>> >>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that >>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer >>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how >>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing >>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most >>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by >>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their >>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. >>> >>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop >>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe. >> >> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking, >> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia. >> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical >> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much >> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as >> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of >> power to play a game every hour. > > I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting > Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news). > I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the > amount of electricity required to charge a laptop. If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here. > I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need > and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs > (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD > CPU). > > And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or > use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will > be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.) ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64 PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens sooner, all the better. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-17 20:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vjsn1q$1sthq$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #680572 |
On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: > Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit : >> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit : >>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >>>>>> >>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >>>>>> to live without computers at all. >>>>> >>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that >>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer >>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how >>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing >>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most >>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by >>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their >>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. >>>> >>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop >>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe. >>> >>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking, >>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia. >>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical >>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much >>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as >>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of >>> power to play a game every hour. >> >> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting >> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news). >> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the >> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop. > > If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at > the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you > buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine > plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North > America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here. Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue. (Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop charging — of any kind). >> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need >> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs >> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD >> CPU). >> >> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or >> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will >> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.) > > ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I > would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64 > PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens > sooner, all the better. I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many times now) I'm not a game player. -- “Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-12-17 18:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Pon8P.23226$EYNf.22658@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #680621 |
Le 2024-12-17 à 15:30, RonB a écrit : > On 2024-12-17, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >> Le 2024-12-17 à 03:13, RonB a écrit : >>> On 2024-12-16, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>> Le 2024-12-16 à 05:27, RonB a écrit : >>>>> On 2024-12-15, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>> Le 2024-12-15 à 02:23, RonB a écrit : >>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>> Le 2024-12-14 à 10:44, RonB a écrit : >>>>>>>>> On 2024-12-14, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Higher performance per watt which leads to lower power use and therefore >>>>>>>>>> improved battery life. Whether Intel and AMD want to admit it or not, >>>>>>>>>> people _do_ want to have a computer which can handle a whole day's work >>>>>>>>>> on a single charge and which won't increase electrical bills. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> While I agree that most people want longer battery life for their laptops, I >>>>>>>>> really don't think the cost of charging a laptop is that big of a concern. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not to a person who lives in an area where electricity is cheap. >>>>>>>> However, it is only going to become more expensive in places like Europe >>>>>>>> where its production depend on a resource acquired from Russia. The same >>>>>>>> way they switched to fuel-efficient or electric cars to lower their >>>>>>>> reliance on gasoline, they are probably going to switch to >>>>>>>> energy-efficient machines to reduce their need for electricity altogether. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If things are getting that dire in Europe they're going to have to learn >>>>>>> to live without computers at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> If this were the 80s and Europe were facing these issues, I imagine that >>>>>> either Atari or Commodore would have produced a very efficient computer >>>>>> which would only need to be charged once daily. Let's not forget how >>>>>> popular the ST and the Amiga were over there while they were failing >>>>>> miserably in North America. Because both companies are dead, the most >>>>>> likely scenario is that they will move to the efficient machines made by >>>>>> Apple or equipped with Qualcomm's processors. I do not think that their >>>>>> energy crisis is going to get better anytime soon. >>>>> >>>>> I'm sorry, but I'm skeptical that the electricity needed to charge a laptop >>>>> is that big of a concern, even in Europe. >>>> >>>> In that case, you should look at how Germany's economy is tanking, >>>> specifically the result of a lack of cheap oil coming in from Russia. >>>> You can imagine that the smaller supply of oil will result in electrical >>>> production being more expensive and for the power bills to be much >>>> higher for the average German. As a result, they are not as likely as >>>> they once might have been to buy the powerful PC which requires 800W of >>>> power to play a game every hour. >>> >>> I don't have to "imagine" that the lack of cheap Russian gas is hurting >>> Germany's economy (that's plain to see every day in the international news). >>> I'm just having trouble imagining that this is resulting in angst about the >>> amount of electricity required to charge a laptop. >> >> If the price you pay for electricity doubles, you are likely to look at >> the devices in your house and make changes in the kind of machine you >> buy. The promise of charging once a day rather than keeping a machine >> plugged is likely to be a benefit to a European. The people of North >> America probably won't care as much since power is cheap here. > > Hypotheticals. I'll remain skeptical that this will be a major issue. > (Unless, of course, there is no power at all — which may be a reality in > Europe if they keep going down the destructive paths they've chosen. In that > case keeping food from spoiling will probably take priority over laptop > charging — of any kind). Only as long as whatever work you do doesn't depend on you having a computer. >>> I purposely use low power laptops and micro desktops because it's all I need >>> and I don't like the background sound of fans. These all run Intel CPUs >>> (except for the Wyse 5060 thin client desktop — it uses a low power AMD >>> CPU). >>> >>> And, as usual, the standard disclaimer, I don't play Windows' video games or >>> use high-end (watt gobbling) GPUs. I'm not sure, though, that ARM chips will >>> be running these games in the future. (I guess we'll see.) >> >> ARM might, but I don't care to stick around to find out. At best, I >> would imagine that ARM will play today's games as well as today's x86-64 >> PCs around 2027 or so through some compatibility layer. If it happens >> sooner, all the better. > > I'm guessing the power required to run Windows complex video games will not > fit in ARM's low-power "wheelhouse." But we'll see. As I've mentioned (many > times now) I'm not a game player. ARM being low-power doesn't mean that it is low-performance. As the Apple processors have shown, they're a lot more powerful than x86-64 processors on single-core applications. They're only worse on multi-core and even then, not by much. ARM basically allows people to have performance like they currently have but through much less battery power. -- CrudeSausage
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web