Ubuntu Ports To ARM

nerdyH writes "Canonical will port Ubuntu Desktop Linux to the ARMv7 architecture. The announcement sets the stage for Intel to lose the traditional 'software advantage' that has enabled x86 to shrug off attacks from other architectures for the last 30 years. How long can it be before Microsoft responds with a Windows 7 port? I mean, x86 just can't do 'idle power' like ARM ... Nokia's N810 tablets can standby for several weeks, just like a cell phone, keeping you 'present' on IM, behind IPv4 NAT the whole time. The first Atom MIDs are standing by for 6-7 hours."

sounds to me...

This sounds to me like a RISC-y proposition.

Re:sounds to me...

I think Canonical will go through with it, but probably keep it at ARM's length.

sounds to me...Up in ARMs.

Well by ARMing Ubuntu, they'll be prepared to wage war on other OSs.

Is the OP serious?

Is the OP serious about Ubuntu's port to ARM causing Intel to worry and Microsoft to follow suit? As much as it is a popular Linux distro, and as much as I personally like Ubuntu and wish this were true, I really don't think Intel is going to lose sleep over Ubuntu on ARM.

Perhaps I'm misreading the tone of the summary. I honestly can't tell if it's is tongue-in-cheek or serious. The absurdity of it makes me think it's poking a little fun, but it reads to me like the guy was serious.

Re:

I think it's "hey, one can only hope". I know I do.

However, I think more important is that someone can now make a "netbook" without having to stick with intel, and still get a complete and modern desktop OS. An extra bonus would be the difficulties to switch to Windows XP.

Re:

I second these thoughts fully - I _WANT_ to see Ubuntu on ARM as a hobbyist.

Pandora

I second these thoughts fully - I _WANT_ to see Ubuntu on ARM as a hobbyist.

Downside: It might make the next batch of Pandora [openpandora.org] preorders sell out that much faster.

Re:

I know I kept looking to make sure the foot icon wasn't really there, hiding somewhere.

Re:

If anything, this is pretty cool for the Pandora [openpandora.org] project.

Re:

You have a point. However many companies (VIA, AMD) are developing a chip like Intel's atom. As these chips are to be put into lower cost computers (MID sub notebooks, netbooks) there is an advantage (in terms of cost) to linux in being able to run on other platforms other than x86.
If for instance I produced a POS till system based on Linux it would be advantageous if I could run this on an ARM processor.
As Linux can run on many different platforms it also frees device manufactures to think differently

Re:

Its proof the OP has about 0 idea what he is talking about. ARM CPUs are not meant to compete with the Desktop/Laptop CPUs, they often lack a lot of the features that those CPUs have. You won't see a whole ton of ARM based desktops anytime soon. ARM does compete(and is already light years ahead in terms of volume) with Intel in the embedded market. Having a version of ubuntu you can customize for a large # of devices does open up a lot of opportunities, but thinking that somehow this will combat Intel's

Ubuntu Alone

Ubuntu alone is not going to "set the stage for Intel to lose the "software advantage"", or anyone else for that matter, by switching to ARM.
Sure, a few thousand people will be able to switch to an ARM device without blinking, but the rest of the 99.9% of the worlds computer users won't give a flying piece of monkey poo.

WTF? If AMD64 can't do it with a full x86 core...

The announcement sets the stage for Intel to lose the traditional 'software advantage' that has enabled x86 to shrug off attacks from other architectures for the last 30 years.

I am reading this summary as a complete joke.

We are having problems moving to AMD64, and those processors include a full speed x86 compatibility mode. Until there is an ARM7 core that has a full x86 mode I don't think it is going to go anywhere on eliminating the "software advantage" of x86.

We can't even get such smallish things as flash to be offered in 64-bit mode, so what happens to larger Windows only stuff?

Plus Wine wouldn't work, since it isn't an emulator.

Wine CE

Plus Wine wouldn't work, since it isn't an emulator.

Some sort of "Wine CE" would probably work. Windows Mobile runs on ARM CPUs.

Year of Linux on the Desktop?

Now that Ubuntu has finally ported to the ever-popular ARM architecture, maybe 2009 will be the year of Linux on the desktop!

Debian did it first

Uhm... so Ubuntu is a derivative of Debian, and Debian has supported ARM for like... forever. Ubuntu just hasn't followed suit until now.

Not to say this isn't significant. Just give Debian some credit.

Re:

Debian also has had SPARC, SPARC64, Itanium, Alpha, MIPS, etc. for years. What's the big deal?

Intel builds XScale

Xscale uses the ARM architecture and is built by Intel. So, either way Intel makes money.

Re:

Not anymore. Intel sold the XScale division to Marvell in 2006. Since then, Intel has been without a good low-power processor. None of their x86 designs has come close to what a fully static ARM core can achieve in terms of battery life.

Re:

Windows NT ran on Alpha Processors so yes versions of windows have been ported to other architectures. DEC_Alpha [wikipedia.org]

Re:

Windows NT [wikipedia.org] has had versions on "IA-32, AMD64, MIPS R4000, Alpha, PowerPC, and Itanium", but mostly the earlier versions, like 3.1 and 3.51, with XP on Itanium.

Re:

Back in the stone age, NT 3.x and 4 ran on a couple of architectures, MIPS and Alpha.

I never saw anyone use it, anyone remember how well it worked?

Re:

Has any desktop version of windows been ported to any other architecture? Methinks not, it would seem porting something as complex as windows to a completely different architecture would be an insurmountable task.

Actually Windows NT was developed on other platforms, then ported to x86. It was originally released with support for x86, MIPS and Dec Alpha. NT 3.5 added support for PowerPC.

IIRC the MIPS and PowerPC ports were dropped fast, the Alpha port was supported thru all the service packs for NT4. It's only since Win2K that they've dropped the other platforms.

Though according to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] the Win2k Alpha port was almost finished.

Re:

That was 2008, now it's the Year After The Year For Linux, which is incidentally The Year That Microsoft Still Doesn't Care, which is also the year before The Year Microsoft Got Knocked Out Because They Weren't Paying Attention To Open Source. This is all part of the Decade Of Users Realizing Software Can't Always Be Spoon Fed To Them If They Want To Like What They Taste.

Re:

Netbooks do not run on ARM, and they are already supported by Ubuntu...