News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by rbanffy on Sunday May 31, 2020 @05:44PM (#23373041)
There are a couple things going for this machine:

- It's fairly inexpensive, even when compared to cheaper build machines.

- It's very open and easy to hack

- It's fast to the point of being actually useful

- It has a six-core asymmetric CPU (two fast A72 cores, 4 low-power A53 ones). That's not available on any x86 based laptop.

- It's almost completely Windows-proof.

Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by paulryanrogers on Sunday May 31, 2020 @05:57PM (#23373153)
> - It's almost completely Windows-proof.

What does this mean? And why is that good?

Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by hedora on Sunday May 31, 2020 @07:05PM (#23373782)
I’m not the person you replied to, but it’s definitely free of brain damaged bios junk that’s windows specific, and also unremovable enterprise malware, such as the Intel Management Engine.
Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by sukilot on Sunday May 31, 2020 @08:40PM (#23374485)
What does asymmetry achieve? Intel/AMD can downclock themselves.
Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by rbanffy on Monday June 01, 2020 @04:50AM (#23376502)
If you like to play with OSs and how they allocate work, it's a very interesting machine.

Also, remember that Intel doesn't have asymmetric multi-core parts right now, but they already announced Lakefield, which has Tremont and Sunny Cove cores on a single package.

In a sense, it's like playing with Intel's future chip, but with an ARM ISA.

Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by yjftsjthsd-h on Sunday May 31, 2020 @11:21PM (#23375220)
x86 can go to lower clock speeds, but does that get them as low on power use? I was under the impression that Intel failed in the mobile space because they couldn't make x86 fit in a phone's power envelope.
Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by Gibbon1 on Monday June 01, 2020 @12:44AM (#23375527)
I think not that they couldn't but as they say, you don't have be able to outrun the bear, just the guy with you.

Not that they couldn't, just they couldn't beat ARM. And ARM already had a solid footing in the dumb phone space.

I think four things. Two Technical and two business. 0x86's innate power consumption per bit of state change is higher than ARM's. Lack of experience with low power process. No one wants to pay the Intel Tax. And Intel isn't very nice to their customers.

Re:Pinebook Pro, First Impressions by rbanffy on Monday June 01, 2020 @07:27PM (#23385304)
If they spread their investment to compete against AMD in the current x86 niches and with ARM in the low-power spectrum, there won't be enough money to succeed in either.