i personally think yes but it will take some years to fix the problem of most apps not working there.
what do you think?
I don’t know what is or what will be, but I really want Risc V to be the future.
Only if larger companies invest in it more.
RISC-V is inevitable https://www.sifive.com/blog/risc-v-is-inevitable
i think after the nvidia spark thing arm will be more popular.
The only future? No.
Arm and risk V will be around in places where x86 doesn’t make sense. Embedded computing, single board computers, low power consumption devices.
what about gaming laptops? will they be arm?
Already is in the mobile gaming space.
Valve is paving the way to make this possible with FEX, which they’ve developed to let traditional x86 games run on the ARM-based Steam Frame. Since it’s open source, we’re already seeing it show up for other devices, such as GameNative using it to let PC games run on android devices.
Apple is also grabbing additional marketshare right now with their new cheap MacBook Neo that is ARM based, and I think that will pressure windows to make the change as well, at least for laptops.
I don’t know what the timeline is, but I suspect we’ll see a transition to ARM devices once FEX is reliable enough for most software. My understanding is that you miss out on a lot of the power advantages of ARM hardware when running x86 programs through FEX, but it will still be a compatibility crutch while programs transition to being ARM native.
FEX has been an Open Source project for quite some time. Valve has a use-case for it, so has been contributing developer resources and funding for the project, but Valve themselves did not create it. It’s simply a useful tool in a pivot they want to make for their portable gaming devices and expansion.
Valve actually initiated FEX and has been funding it since the very beginning, there was an interview with the Verge where they talk about it.
Basically the whole thing is Valve’s baby, they have a lot of different open source projects that they are quietly funding.
I think no, a part from much better power management, what advantage does arm offer over Intel compatible?
Also, arm is much more proprietary and less open than Intel, so I hope not
arm is much more proprietary and less open than Intel
That is exactly backwards. How many companies are licensed to make Intel/AMD comparable CPUs? 4? 6? How many for Arm? Hundreds of companies (Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, etc.).
why do you need it to be open? im asking genuinely.
To prevent enshitification.
Oh pretty please let me pay a licensing fee on top of an already expensive part
Because monoplies are bad…
Sharing is caring
This future, unfortunately, appears to be rented thin clients and smartphones/tablets, for most people.
So… technically, yes, the future is ARM? As those things will often use that.
From an efficiencies perspective, I really like the idea of high-performance compute being centralized and low-power devices at the edge.
Essentially going back to the dumb terminal method. Or like BBS’s. Local-ish but consolidated.
But the idea of pooling all that compute into the hands of a few giant corporations is horrifying.
I’d much rather have, say, a competitive marketplace of service providers in local datacenters selling a specific service. I.e., I could subscribe to a Moonlight service that some dude sells on a pool of high-performance gaming servers at a colocation data center/carrier hotel (the type of places where businesses rent space and can get really fast connections to internet service providers, because they have their hubs in the same building)
Essentially the same idea as, say, Xbox Cloud Gaming, or even Google Stadia (it was ahead of its time and honestly shouldn’t have even allowed wireless)…but less closed.
As a filthy casual, I don’t want the arms race of graphics cards. I don’t want to do 30 minutes of patching to play a game I only have an hour to play. I just want to pick up the controller and go with as little friction as possible.
i saw this view a lot on pcmr when i was using reddit. but it doesn’t make sense,there is no evidence thin clients are the future. internet speeds aren’t even good enough for most people worldwide for that to be the future.
so why do you think its the future?
I would say cost because of capitalism. It’s very cheap to run, subscription based, low cost entry, push ads, data gathering, and just about any device can run it regardless of OS or performance.
It doesn’t need to reach everyone, just the ones willing to pay for it.
I’m not in favor of it but I do see why it would make sense for some people
