ARM wants the sub $200 netbook market

The whole debate about "netbook" is funny to me. You would think intelligent people would have a clear view of history. Yes for the present time people are moving backward with respect to computing power in exchange for price. However people seem to think this is an end game, bad performance cheap PC. In another five years when a netbook has 16 cores and plays Crisis for $100 dollars I think it will be rather silly to bemoan the trend.

I think people are forgetting some obvious contenders that will appear in this market. There are companies with higher performing, lower power chips that will pull netbooks under $100... wait.

There may be an architectural battle - ARM v Intel - but the chips battle isn't ARM v. Intel - ARM don't make chips. It's ST+Samsung+Qualcomm+TI+... v. Intel. And this battle Intel will surely lose as there is only one of it.

But if Intel's deal with TSMC puts x86 cores into TSMC's standard library offering, or Intel opens up their own process then the battle will get really interesting.

I will gladly buy an ARM Netbook for $200 or less. Use Linux, have no problem with it being ARM, when I'm on the go battery life is item numero uno for me.

yeah, put them out and watch them fail as people want windows, and readily available x86 software. adobe flash doesnt even run on ARM yet!!!! there is supposed to be progress on that, but for crying out loud, who wants a NETbook that cant even browse the internet properly because of its lack of support for major video standards? ARM netbooks will not work for consumers. the fact that software support is also fragmented and there is little standards for any new arm platform that appears one week to the next, all you are going to have is compatibility headaches every time you turn the thing on. im sorry. they just wont.

I think what can be against his vision is the Windows problem. Many retail stores have tried before to get into the high volume game with cheap Linux based notebooks. For example, Wallmart tried with a low cost Linux based notebook line which lasted no more than a year. Unfortunately, the public still demands a Windows OS to run Windows based programs.

adobe flash doesnt even run on ARM yet!

If Adobe Flash doesn't run on ARM, what is this Adobe Flash plugin that has been running on my ARM powered, Linux based, Nokia Internet Tablet since 2005? I've got Flash v9 on my N810 (2008), and started out with Flash v7 on a 770 (2005).

ARM/Linux powered netbooks have all the software they need - available today, right now - to match Windows in terms of functionality, and slaughter it on price.

It's an amazing time to see where a third company can come into play with AMD and Intel to produce a mainstream product that everyone can use in a Laptop form factor.
Aside from a third player in the field, it ushers in motivation from software companies to produce more ARM-supported titles (see the above post about Adobe Flash). If products do not exist and there's no traction for it, why would Adobe waste dev time on it?
Last of all, when you combine mainstream architecture support with active software development, it adds to the value of the platform- and since many products incorporate the ARM Cortex processor, any advancement in netbooks carries the potential to significantly add value to other devices like cell/smart phones and many other low power devices.
There is nothing but good here. I really would like to see ARM succeed in this venture.

Well, that's an interesting perspective, but you have to remember a few key facts:

Intel is the largest semi-conductor producing corporation bar none. Even with all those smaller (in terms of chip production capacity) competing companies, it's going to give a good fight.

AMD and VIA also produce mobile chips for using X86 technology, and are probably quite unlikely to allow their designs be undermined by a mass adoption of the ARM architecture. AMD, VIA and Intel compete much in the same way that Samsung, ST, Qualcomm, etc. do.

@ neil flash does run on ARM, but not natively. that is probably what VP meant. and that is a major obstacle. when a major percentage of web video is flashed based, ARM wont be able to accelerate it particularly reliably. you dont seem to understand that accelerating flash @ 30FPS on larger screen and higher resolutions that netbooks offer comparitive to mobile devices is right on the limit of ARM capability. its a whole other ball game dealing with netbooks....

i dont think that people understand how much consumers are addicted to windows and/or X86 software. ARM would have broken into higher end mobile segments like laptops by now if it was viable, but they havent because it isnt. people want scaled down laptops, not scaled up mobile PDAs or phone devices. this is simply why ARM will fail horribly in the netbook market. windows and x86 will always give that assured feeling that, yes im just buying a mini pc that does everything very similar to what my windows at home does. also there are no real set standards across flavours of ARM linux for applications. you could be looking at all sorts of software problems across various platforms, where one app will run on one ARM powered machine on one flavour of linux properly, but not another.

ARM is underpowered, and underdeveloped software wise for this platform. i cant see it taking hold whatsoever against the next generation of OEM backed, X86, HD screen, windows enabled, intel or VIA powered machines with relatively powerful integrated graphics. this is all about the internet experience of course, and i doubt ARM machines can deliver in time to cement a reputation.

I think that with Apple's iphone app store concept/combination, there isn't any excuse anymore for a truly competitive manufacturer not to have the app distribution mechanism tied into the hardware they make.

Rim have done it for the blackberry, Apple for the iPhone as mentioned, Palm will do it for the Pre, and Google via something similar for Android.

As long as you have a hardware platform that you are going to back for the long run, developers WILL get behind you and back your efforts. ARM would do well i reckon, especially if the hardware is keenly priced and the developers supplying applications can also do so at a keen price.

The system is in place as a proven concept - how many can harness it is a different issue...

China and other developing economies don't care about Microsoft Windows. Linux is just fine outside of developed countries. ARM is after volume markets and already sells many licensed CPUs for embedded applications than does Intel.

This is a classical disruptive technology that has been long predicted by Linux advocates - how can Microsoft make money when the manufacturer's software budget is under US $10? Intel must match ARM in process technology which it can - but the trick for Intel will be not to destroy demand for US $100 processors in the notebook market.

This is overall great for the consumer! Just as AMD falters, ARM steps up to battle Intel. Billions of new consumers are waiting.

Socks for Christmas is been tried b4.

Until I see decent Open Office and Eclipse performances - I'd not buy any ARMs or legs. They might support Linux' desktop manager well, but I doubt any Java apps will run smoothly, given they struggle sometimes even on C2D.

For all those commenting how you want super power. I have to say my newest computer is 4 years old. The one I use most is 7 years old.

The only thing they can not do is play super hi res movies (eg 1080p WMHD format or blu-ray)

If I could get a sub notebook to let me type a note in open office, view the internet, and watch a DVD (or ripped DVD) now and then I would be pretty happy.

Heck if I could replace my home computers with really low power ones of the same capacity, I would probably do that too, to save a bit of energy.

Gamers arn't the only folks in the univese

I have to agree with Mark's post.
My most powerful computer is watrercooled C2Q + 4GB ram with GTX260 and SSD HD.
Is it most used ? No.
Most used is 6 years old IBM X31.
It is good for book reading, programing, browsing internet and watching movies on the go.
It has ~ same raw power as netbook.
Do I need more power? No.
What i need is more battery time and less heat. And i'll be happy to have it with touch screen.
Will I pay +-2000USD ? NO
I'll buy something like
http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/touchbook/
About software. My preferred OS is Linux. I do not mind to use Windows some times for gaming when i can't run some game on Linux.
But for mobile device, I can't see reason to use Windows.

This device will be a remote screen for my main PC and Mac.

It needs enough oomph to do an mpeg2 stream itself or whatever format $FAVOURITE_VIDEO_PLAYER uses. That's all. I'm not burdening it with an office suite when my main PC can run it faster and with more features and project it to me in realtime.

Just ship this device with some kind of remote PC screencaster, and that will keep most of the 'it doesn't run Windows!!' crowd quiet.

Now sit back and enjoy the battery life.

When ARM makes these ridiculous statements it is comical... 1 hour battery life? And he really thinks this is CPU based? He knows it's not yet he chooses to mislead.

How about the screen? Hard drive? Memory? optical drive? The CPU/chipset accounts for less than 1/2 the power used and will become increasing less over time (especially as x86 moves toward SOC).

And this clock for clock crap has got to stop... this is only meaningful if the chips available are at similar clocks. Or do we want some coming out with a 50Mhz chip that is the world's fastest 'clock for clock'.

..disclaimer: I'm no expert

I have an armpowered n800 and an aspireone
...and I can report that the n800 is handy but chokes on graphics intense webpages and flash..and lasts 5+ hours..

The Aspire one does ok on most everyday tasks and lasts 4+ hours on the 6 cell battery...so...

The consensus that the arm sticking point is graphics fits my experience and the consensus that intel hasn't made a really low power chip set yet also fits..so..as they say the dream of the 100$ all day laptop that is graphics friendly sis still...vapor wear..

Most of the power consumption and much of the hardware cost in netbooks is the display.

Battery life won't depend enormously on which CPU is in there.

If ARM can make my little "electronic dictionary + email + web browser + notepad" utility device, great. I do see there is a market for such sub-netbook devices, but they'd probably do well to avoid direct competition with the netbook-as-PC windows7+atom experience.

To the people stating that battery life is more dependent on the screen and other components - you do have a point of course.
However, I own a GBA and a Nintendo DS and the battery life on both of them is incredible and their graphics processing capabilities are very good even though they only have very small batteries. I think that an ARM powered netbook could deliver great battery life and if the price is good I'll definitely buy one.

Just to clarify :

@chippy/VP - Flash does run on ARM, it has done for a while and it DOES run natively. However, it hasn't been heavily optimised for the platform yet. This is to change however with the Flash 10 where it will be optimised.

@what a waste - Apart from the fact that we are beginning to see ARM processors from the likes of Qualcomm and Freescale that will clock around 1Ghz, it's not all about more Mhz means more performance. The general consensus is that people want longer battery life over high Mhz/performance. After all we mostly check our email, surf the net, watch the odd film. I don't need 1.6GHz to do that, I don't need x86 to do that, I don't need windows to do that.

It seems to me that the power usage of the Atom was like 1-2 watts when the chip was asleep but it jumped to something like 50 watts when it was doing work. Would someone tell me if this is approximately correct and what are the corresponding ARM numbers.

Just in case others had the same question I did, those fine folks with ARM based Nokia devices successfully ran OpenOffice (2.4 as of May 2008).

While it was reported it ran slightly slower than Abiword, Openoffice was still quite usable.

captcha:INQLRS (the InQuirer's long running sentece?)

Nokia screwed up the graphics hardware on the N800/N810, the interface between the ARM CPU and the LCD screen is compromised due to bad design, it has nothing to do with the ARM chip. In addition Nokia have been unable to utilise the TI OMAP2's built-in PowerVR 3D graphics or associated video acceleration due to lack of open source drivers/time/manpower and the afore-mentioned sucky video interface design.

Basically, the short comings of the N8x0 Internet Tablets are not down to the ARM SOC hardware, it's a failing in other hardware and software departments (thanks to Nokia) that have compromised the performance of these devices.

But considering the N8x0 runs for 5+ hours on it's tiny mobile phone-sized battery, while the x86 Aspire lasts 4+ hours on it's much larger 6 cell battery, have you considered how long an N8x0 run on a decent 6-cell battery?

As others have said, ARM netbooks won't appeal to the gameheads but instead to those who want all day usage for basic tasks (email, web, office) and current and future ARM processors (ie. Cortex A8 and multi-core A9) are more than capable of providing this computing capability...

he is going to open a can of whoopass on intel?

Its using WIndows that CAUSE's the massive power drains.. Its behaviour is designed to be CPU draining (to get Intel support). Now you are asking them to go against every tenet of their beliefs and design a power saving version? Windows CE perhaps.. but not XP and Not even W7. W8n (for netbook)

As expected - the two 'usual' tribes ...

tribe 1: Can't/won't have anything unless it's MS/X86...
(fine - but be prepared to pay extra for it!)

tribe 2: Linux/Unix types/newbies/don't care as long as it does 'what is required'... (and is cheap!)

I'm with 'tribe 2' - give me a low priced/long battery life ARM netbook that can run a full Linux distro and I'll be very happy.

I suggest that 'tribe 1 types' start researching the ARM CPU's because what is likely to come along soon is a nice performance, low power ***multi-core*** CPU (Cortex A9) which should be great for Linux netbooks + long battery life. Intel really have got their work cut out doing a low power, single-core X86 PLUS all the other SoC functionality (audio/graphics etc) which all consume their own extra bits of power.
[Question1: Why haven't INTEL done this already if it's easy? They've had plenty of time!
Question2: Why did Intel licence low power ARM architecture several years ago (StrongARM -- XScale) when they could have chosen to develop low power X86 then?]

Maybe it's not so easy and not so cheap?

Remember, X86 has an inherently large die size (loads of transistors). ARM is inherently small die size (less transistors - less power). Whatever Intel do to shrink X86 die size, so can ARM. In simple terms, X86 always generates more heat unless architecture is fundamentally changed - but then how will it perform? Would it still be 'full X86'?

Technically, this is all about chip architecture for low power use.
I want to do my bit for the planet (and save a bit on my electricity bill too - at least over X86).
Just think, if the whole world really starts to take green computing seriously...ARM is the answer???

Windows 7 on ARM would be an interesting distraction (MS/ARM vs MS/Intel? - whoaaah...!)

Politically not simple - is it?

The availability of these inexpensive devices will be transformative in ways we can't even see yet... When every man, woman and child has access to a certain minimum of information and communication technology, new applications are going to emerge.

The killer app I have in mind is Spaced Repetition learning, basically optimized computer flash cards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition

By hacking as close to the brain's raw memorization capability as possible, the way we teach certain things will be transformed.

Also, when everyone has access to a few gig, a decent screen, and stereo audio that they can carry around, what happens to the content production industries? News/music/movie/tv/etc. Even the web will be transformed.

And all without Wintel.