Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
I agree that sparc64 is currently the best alternative to the x86
architecture in i386 and amd64. For me, the biggest obstacles
Martin SchrC6der wrote:
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
It's too bad that Apple discontinued their PPC. It was an acceptable
price
On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 06:53:38PM +0200, Lars Nood??n wrote:
Martin SchrC6der wrote:
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
It's
On 10/26/07, Matthew Szudzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
If anyone is looking for a non-x86 laptop, there aren't many choices. Is
there any
On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 09:59:43AM -0400, Jeff Quast wrote:
On 10/26/07, Matthew Szudzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
If anyone
ropers wrote:
On 24/10/2007, Lars NoodC)n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available,
especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors?
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm
http://www.intel.com/pressroom
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not sure there is a context in which Wikipedia is ever relevant: it
It's only as relevant as YOU help make it.
Shut up and improve it.
Best
Martin
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 01:39:56PM +0200, Martin Schr?der wrote:
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm not sure there is a context in which Wikipedia is ever relevant: it
It's only as relevant as YOU help make it.
Shut up and improve it.
why don't you shuddup?
cu
--
On 10/26/07, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the specific context of CALEA, the AMT wikipedia page as of Fri Oct
26 07:45:59 GMT 2007, does not contain any references to CALEA, but do
contain the links I provided above. The CALEA page points to links
easily found with search engines.
2007/10/26, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
Best
Martin
, what are the details?
If not, what non-x86 options are available for regular workstations and
servers. There's a shitload available for embedded devices and such.
Where are the choices for non-x86?
-Lars
Where are the choices for non-x86?
The only remaining alternative is Sparc. Everything else is either old
(macppc) or expensive unsupported (IA64).
If anyone is looking for a non-x86 laptop, there aren't many choices. Is
there any information about OpenBSD on the following Sparc laptop
On 24/10/2007, Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available,
especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors?
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive
on the other side of this brand new pile of shit.
Seriously, what (affordable) non-x86 hardware options are available,
especially those without AMT or AMT-like backdoors?
http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/articles/eng/1148.htm
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases
corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or
even available ?
Regards,
-Lars
corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or
even available ?
Regards,
-Lars
that the AMD Geode seems to be
x86-based.
What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or
even available ?
Regards,
-Lars
Do you have any special reasons for not using x86-based hardware?
BR
dunceor
query to the list.
... on epiacenter website ...
I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3,
eden, TM8600, etc.
One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT?
There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell
or Freescale
of products manufacturers.
Yes. I know. Hence my query to the list.
... on epiacenter website ...
I find only x86-based units there: celeron, amd geode, pentium, c3,
eden, TM8600, etc.
One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT?
There has got to be non
, amd geode, pentium, c3,
eden, TM8600, etc.
One ARM on the list, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT?
There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell
or Freescale or anything else.
Regards,
-Lars
Karl SjC6dahl - dunceor wrote:
What is AMT?
http://www.intel.com/technology/platform-technology/intel-amt/index.htm
aka rootkit for everybody
http://strombergson.com/kryptoblog/?p=311
Well ARM is not under Intel, Intel does ARM-processors just like
several others do (Atmel, TI, Phillips
, though. But isn't ARM now under Intel, maker of AMT?
Not all Intel CPUs are i386-compatible, of course...
There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell
or Freescale or anything else.
Freescale is a company, not a CPU architecture - looks like
they have designs
Lars Noodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There has got to be non-x86 units out there, SBC or other, running Cell
or Freescale or anything else.
If you look hard enough, I think you can find ARM/MIPS/PowerPC based
single-board computers vaguely comparable to the Soekris range.
Heck, just look
that the AMD Geode seems to be
x86-based.
indeed. meaning it uses the same compiler and kernel as the most
widely tested port of openbsd.
What corresponding non-x86 hardware options are common, recommended, or
even available ?
why would you want such a thing?
24 matches
Mail list logo
