<https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/report-arm-is-sensationally-canceling-qualcomms-chip-license-oct-2024>

What you need to know

A new report suggests that Arm Holdings PLC is ending its contract with
Qualcomm Inc. which allows the firm to build chip designs based on Arm
technology.
The cancelation notice lasts for only 60 days, and escalates an on-going
dispute between the UK-based chip architecture giant Arm and US-based
chip maker Qualcomm for processors that are in everything from TVs, to
smartphones, to Microsoft's new Copilot+ PCs.
If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone industry,
given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging Arm-based
Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
Qualcomm and Arm have been in a legal dispute for a couple of years now,
and this is the latest escalation in a battle that shows no signs of
slowing down.
--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:39:40 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone
> industry, given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging
> Arm-based Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.

Android is Linux-based, and runs on a wide variety of ARM SoCs from a
range of vendors.

Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be in
peril.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:39:40 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> <https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/report-arm-is-sensationally-
canceling-qualcomms-chip-license-oct-2024>
>
> What you need to know
>
> A new report suggests that Arm Holdings PLC is ending its contract with
> Qualcomm Inc. which allows the firm to build chip designs based on Arm
> technology.

The Register has a similar write up

https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/23/arm_warns_qualcomm_on_licenses

The same page today also has

https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/23/rva23_profile_ratified/

If the Arm/Qualcomm thing turns into a SCO-like fiasco it may make Intel
and AMD a little gun shy.

https://www.servethehome.com/hell-freezes-over-amd-and-intel-come-
together-ocp/

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 20:44:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:39:40 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone
>> industry, given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
>> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging
>> Arm-based Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
>
> Android is Linux-based, and runs on a wide variety of ARM SoCs from a
> range of vendors.
>
> Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be
> in peril.

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/windows-on-arm-may-be-a-
thing-of-the-past-soon-arm-ceo-confirms-qualcomms-exclusivity-agreement-
with-microsoft-expires-this-year

I doubt Microsoft has been working without Plan B.

https://liliputing.com/sifive-hifive-premiere-p550-risc-v-board-is-now-
available-for-developers-in-very-limited-quantities/

There are quite a few less expensive RISC-V boards that run Linux but
given the specs and the mini-ITX mount SiFive may be aiming higher. SiFive
has had its problems including an Intel deal falling through. Coupled with
the RISC-V family getting a real definition it could be another direction.

On 24 Oct 2024 00:28:09 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 20:44:12 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be
>> in peril.

> https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/windows-on-arm-may-be-a-thing-of-the-past-soon-arm-ceo-confirms-qualcomms-exclusivity-agreement-with-microsoft-expires-this-year
>
> I doubt Microsoft has been working without Plan B.

It took them so long to get this far with ARM, to have to scrap it all
and start again with RISC-V would mean throwing away tens or hundreds
of millions of existing investment. Windows profits are in decline as it
is.

On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
><https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/report-arm-is-sensationally-canceling-qualcomms-chip-license-oct-2024>
>
> What you need to know
>
> A new report suggests that Arm Holdings PLC is ending its contract with
> Qualcomm Inc. which allows the firm to build chip designs based on Arm
> technology.
> The cancelation notice lasts for only 60 days, and escalates an on-going
> dispute between the UK-based chip architecture giant Arm and US-based
> chip maker Qualcomm for processors that are in everything from TVs, to
> smartphones, to Microsoft's new Copilot+ PCs.
> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone industry,
> given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging Arm-based
> Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
> Qualcomm and Arm have been in a legal dispute for a couple of years now,
> and this is the latest escalation in a battle that shows no signs of
> slowing down.

It sounds like a destructive battle for both companies... Unless ARM has
ulterior motives, like making a deal with Intel or something like that.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

On 2024-10-24 2:25 a.m., RonB wrote:
> On 2024-10-23, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> <https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/report-arm-is-sensationally-canceling-qualcomms-chip-license-oct-2024>
>>
>> What you need to know
>>
>> A new report suggests that Arm Holdings PLC is ending its contract with
>> Qualcomm Inc. which allows the firm to build chip designs based on Arm
>> technology.
>> The cancelation notice lasts for only 60 days, and escalates an on-going
>> dispute between the UK-based chip architecture giant Arm and US-based
>> chip maker Qualcomm for processors that are in everything from TVs, to
>> smartphones, to Microsoft's new Copilot+ PCs.
>> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone industry,
>> given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
>> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging Arm-based
>> Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
>> Qualcomm and Arm have been in a legal dispute for a couple of years now,
>> and this is the latest escalation in a battle that shows no signs of
>> slowing down.
>
> It sounds like a destructive battle for both companies... Unless ARM has
> ulterior motives, like making a deal with Intel or something like that.

What I can say for sure is that I am a fan of the architecture for its
ability to produce tremendous power while requiring little energy. Once
it's time to replace this laptop, I don't see how I would be able to go
for another x86-64 machine when the ARM ones have nothing but advantages
in comparison.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:25:20 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> It sounds like a destructive battle for both companies... Unless ARM has
> ulterior motives, like making a deal with Intel or something like that.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/intel-sells-stake-chip-designer-arm-
holdings-2024-08-13/

Intel is thrashing around at the moment.AMD is in the game too.

https://www.techradar.com/pro/amd-teams-up-with-arm-to-unveil-ai-chip-
family-that-does-preprocessing-inference-and-postprocessing-on-one-
silicon-but-you-will-have-to-wait-more-than-12-months-to-get-actual-
products

Then there's the rapprochement of AMD and Intel in support of the x86 ISA.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 09:05:51 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> What I can say for sure is that I am a fan of the architecture for its
> ability to produce tremendous power while requiring little energy.

RISC-V has the potential to match that, too. As ARM makes more and more
customers nervous, I expect this will only boost the fortunes of RISC-V.

> Once it's time to replace this laptop, I don't see how I would be able
> to go for another x86-64 machine when the ARM ones have nothing but
> advantages in comparison.

The trouble with Windows-on-ARM is, most of those “advantages” represent
promises rather than actuality.

Unless you want to run Linux on it ...

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 15:39:40 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone
>> industry, given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
>> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging
>> Arm-based Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
>
>Android is Linux-based, and runs on a wide variety of ARM SoCs from a
>range of vendors.
>
>Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be in
>peril.

You do realize that Windows ARM can run on a Mac?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>On 2024-10-24 2:25 a.m., RonB wrote:
>
>>> <https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/report-arm-is-sensationally-canceling-qualcomms-chip-license-oct-2024>
>>>
>>> What you need to know
>>>
>>> A new report suggests that Arm Holdings PLC is ending its contract with
>>> Qualcomm Inc. which allows the firm to build chip designs based on Arm
>>> technology.
>>> The cancelation notice lasts for only 60 days, and escalates an on-going
>>> dispute between the UK-based chip architecture giant Arm and US-based
>>> chip maker Qualcomm for processors that are in everything from TVs, to
>>> smartphones, to Microsoft's new Copilot+ PCs.
>>> If the cancelation goes through, it could upend the smartphone industry,
>>> given that Snapdragon processors power the vast majority of
>>> Android-based smartphones and tablets, and as well as emerging Arm-based
>>> Windows PCs like the Surface Pro 11.
>>> Qualcomm and Arm have been in a legal dispute for a couple of years now,
>>> and this is the latest escalation in a battle that shows no signs of
>>> slowing down.
>>
>> It sounds like a destructive battle for both companies... Unless ARM has
>> ulterior motives, like making a deal with Intel or something like that.
>
>What I can say for sure is that I am a fan of the architecture for its
>ability to produce tremendous power while requiring little energy. Once
>it's time to replace this laptop, I don't see how I would be able to go
>for another x86-64 machine when the ARM ones have nothing but advantages
>in comparison.

I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete
that and put Debian on.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 10/25/2024 5:55 AM, Joel wrote:

> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete
> that and put Debian on.

What happened to openSuse?

I don't use Linux much anyway, but I won't ever again try or install
distros with a 'code of conduct' or a DEI statement, both of which
Debian and Ubuntu have.

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:

>> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
>> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete
>> that and put Debian on.
>
>What happened to openSuse?

Actually, I might go with openSUSE for the laptop, it wasn't as good
as Debian turned out to be for my desktop setup, but I liked it in
most ways.

>I don't use Linux much anyway, but I won't ever again try or install
>distros with a 'code of conduct' or a DEI statement, both of which
>Debian and Ubuntu have.

Here we go, I don't care about this shit. I eat Chick-fil-A and
Waffle House, I just don't give a damn about their political dealings,
fuck it, a man's gotta eat and they serve up some bangin' food.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 05:55:21 -0400, Joel wrote:

> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete that
> and put Debian on.

Do you have an ARM laptop or is that hearsay?

On 2024-10-25 2:09 p.m., DFS wrote:
> On 10/25/2024 5:55 AM, Joel wrote:
>
>
>> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
>> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete
>> that and put Debian on.
>
>
> What happened to openSuse?
>
> I don't use Linux much anyway, but I won't ever again try or install
> distros with a 'code of conduct' or a DEI statement, both of which
> Debian and Ubuntu have.

I just cancelled my subscription to an independent newspaper here in
Montreal because they wrote an article trying to get their readers to
sympathize with some tranny who fears for his life in Missouri because
some old man at a gas station told him to "stay safe." The distributions
submitting to such faggots seriously need to die.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 05:48:18 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be
>>in peril.
>
> You do realize that Windows ARM can run on a Mac?

Of course I had to look that up
<https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/options-for-using-windows-11-with-mac-computers-with-apple-m1-m2-and-m3-chips-cd15fd62-9b34-4b78-b0bc-121baa3c568c>:

Windows 11 runs best on a PC designed for Windows. When such an
option isn't available, here are two different ways to use Windows
with Mac.

The first method is “streaming” Windows 11 to a Mac running macOS.

The second method involves running Windows 11 virtually, under
Parallels Desktop, again under macOS. Even then, lots of things won’t
work properly:

The Arm version of Windows 11 has limitations that can impact your
ability to use various types of hardware, games, and apps,
including those that rely on DirectX 12, a suite of multimedia
technologies frequently used in Windows games and other apps.

Neither one gets rid of the need for macOS. Neither one allows running
Windows 11 on bare ARM metal.

In other words, neither one offers the capabilities of Asahi Linux.

rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

>> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
>> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete that
>> and put Debian on.
>
>Do you have an ARM laptop or is that hearsay?

Were that I had any real credit left, I'd buy one, but no, I'm in
debt, and have to be satisfied with my Intel CPU desktop.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>>>Windows-on-ARM runs only on Qualcomm chips, and that would certainly be
>>>in peril.
>>
>> You do realize that Windows ARM can run on a Mac?
>
>Of course I had to look that up
><https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/options-for-using-windows-11-with-mac-computers-with-apple-m1-m2-and-m3-chips-cd15fd62-9b34-4b78-b0bc-121baa3c568c>:
>
> Windows 11 runs best on a PC designed for Windows. When such an
> option isn't available, here are two different ways to use Windows
> with Mac.
>
>The first method is “streaming” Windows 11 to a Mac running macOS.
>
>The second method involves running Windows 11 virtually, under
>Parallels Desktop, again under macOS. Even then, lots of things won’t
>work properly:
>
> The Arm version of Windows 11 has limitations that can impact your
> ability to use various types of hardware, games, and apps,
> including those that rely on DirectX 12, a suite of multimedia
> technologies frequently used in Windows games and other apps.
>
>Neither one gets rid of the need for macOS. Neither one allows running
>Windows 11 on bare ARM metal.
>
>In other words, neither one offers the capabilities of Asahi Linux.

Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple
metal, just implying that it isn't supported by M$.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 18:44:50 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple metal,
> just implying that it isn't supported by M$.

I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the only
ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.

Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>> Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple metal,
>> just implying that it isn't supported by M$.
>
>I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the only
>ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.
>
>Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.

It's not obvious. The only obvious thing is that they don't want to
tell you it's OK, to do it.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 18:33:08 -0400, Joel wrote:

> rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>
>>> I wouldn't ever buy another x86 laptop, but the ARM ones are sweet.
>>> Even Win11 wouldn't be so terrible on one, but I'd of course delete
>>> that and put Debian on.
>>
>>Do you have an ARM laptop or is that hearsay?
>
>
> Were that I had any real credit left, I'd buy one, but no, I'm in debt,
> and have to be satisfied with my Intel CPU desktop.

It's seat of the pants with no real benchmarks but my Raspberry Pi 5 with
the Debian Bookworm derived Raspberry Pi OS is reasonable. Compiling for
the Pico is speedy and VS Code is comparable to the other boxes.

So far the offerings are pricey and I don't have a compelling need for
another laptop. Battery life isn't too important to me.

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 19:00:55 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple
>>> metal, just implying that it isn't supported by M$.
>>
>> I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the
>> only ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.
>>
>> Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.
>
> It's not obvious.

You think Microsoft would forego an opportunity to tout the richness of
its Windows user experience?

> The only obvious thing is that they don't want to tell you it's OK,
> to do it.

Because they know that only disappointment lies in that direction.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>>>> Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple
>>>> metal, just implying that it isn't supported by M$.
>>>
>>> I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the
>>> only ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.
>>>
>>> Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.
>>
>> It's not obvious.
>
>You think Microsoft would forego an opportunity to tout the richness of
>its Windows user experience?

They haven't done testing of Win11 on the new Macs, that doesn't mean
it wouldn't work.

>> The only obvious thing is that they don't want to tell you it's OK,
>> to do it.
>
>Because they know that only disappointment lies in that direction.

How do you know?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 10:43:34 -0400, Joel wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> Nothing in the document you linked to says it can't run on Apple
>>>>> metal, just implying that it isn't supported by M$.
>>>>
>>>> I assume Microsoft “supports” those techniques because they are the
>>>> only ones that offer anything approaching a quality user experience.
>>>>
>>>> Obviously trying to run Windows-on-ARM on bare Apple metal does not.
>>>
>>> It's not obvious.
>>
>>You think Microsoft would forego an opportunity to tout the richness of
>>its Windows user experience?
>
> They haven't done testing of Win11 on the new Macs, that doesn't mean it
> wouldn't work.

This is Microsoft. There is stuff they *did* test that doesn’t work.

>>> The only obvious thing is that they don't want to tell you it's OK,
>>> to do it.
>>
>> Because they know that only disappointment lies in that direction.
>
> How do you know?

Because Windows is a complex piece of software. And Microsoft is a profit-
driven company.

Le 26-10-2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> a écrit :
>
> This is Microsoft. There is stuff they *did* test that doesn’t work.

That's the real world. If you wait for all the tests to be OK before
releasing anything, you'll never release anything. Now some failed tests
are more important than others and you need to fix the limit between
critical failures and minor failures. I'm not saying the limit fixed by
Microsoft is good, I'm only saying that the limit is not a Microsoft
exclusive way of realising features.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io