The Cellar - View Single Post

mbpark · 05-04-2006, 05:23 PM

VPro is the marketing name for their built-in hypervisor, which will allow you to run multiple OSes at once.

AMD has the same technology, code-named Pacifica.

In other words, these chips will have the same functionality IBM's old mainframes did in the 1970's.

Part of the plan, apparently, is to run one OS as the base, trusted OS, and then run Windows or Linux on top of that. This, combined with EFI, has big-brotherish potential.

However, for those of us who want to run multiple OSes, this means that you'll be able to run Xen, VmWare, Parallels, or your choice of software and run multiple operating environments at native speed.

Who is to say that Microsoft won't take something small and stable, such as Singularity (their research OS), and use that as the root OS to prevent you from doing things?

Heck, if I were MS, I'd have something booting up in EFI that's non-legacy such as Singularity or a custom build of OpenBSD (they already ship large chunks of it in UNIX Services for Windows), have that OS simulate a BIOS, and then load Vista on top of that. "Instant" circumvention of people attempting to do things via the HW by BIOS traps. And, AMD and Intel support it.

Otherwise, on Intel vs. AMD here....Intel does have one good division which designed the Pentium M, and may have worked on its successors, which will come out this year. Intel Israel may have saved their butts by reworking an already existing architecture (the P6) instead of starting from scratch (the P4).

I may be a little off on this, but remember the last time this happened? Intel designed a new chip from scratch, and after cutting their losses, released a new chip which was based off of the old one in some way.

Oh yeah, it happened twice

. We call them the i432 and i960. The i432 or whatever it was called was eclipsed by the 386, and the i960 was eclipsed by the 486 and Pentium.

Intel's biggest failure has been the Itanium. After billions upon billions of dollars, and hiring many of the best compiler people in the business, they've only succeeded in hitting the niche markets. It is also not x86 compatible, and apparently is incredibly hard to program for. The only Itaniums I have heard of run HP-UX or Linux.

AMD, on the other hand, took an existing design, worked with it to include HyperTransport links on the chip, and made something which was less expensive to manufacture and had a lower cost for SW development by supporting already-existing tools and environments.

Intel tried to go with the bigger and faster route. AMD just made it incredibly attractive to have an Opteron.

05-04-2006, 05:23 PM	#1
mbpark Lecturer Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Carmel, Indiana Posts: 761	VPro VPro is the marketing name for their built-in hypervisor, which will allow you to run multiple OSes at once. AMD has the same technology, code-named Pacifica. In other words, these chips will have the same functionality IBM's old mainframes did in the 1970's. Part of the plan, apparently, is to run one OS as the base, trusted OS, and then run Windows or Linux on top of that. This, combined with EFI, has big-brotherish potential. However, for those of us who want to run multiple OSes, this means that you'll be able to run Xen, VmWare, Parallels, or your choice of software and run multiple operating environments at native speed. Who is to say that Microsoft won't take something small and stable, such as Singularity (their research OS), and use that as the root OS to prevent you from doing things? Heck, if I were MS, I'd have something booting up in EFI that's non-legacy such as Singularity or a custom build of OpenBSD (they already ship large chunks of it in UNIX Services for Windows), have that OS simulate a BIOS, and then load Vista on top of that. "Instant" circumvention of people attempting to do things via the HW by BIOS traps. And, AMD and Intel support it. Otherwise, on Intel vs. AMD here....Intel does have one good division which designed the Pentium M, and may have worked on its successors, which will come out this year. Intel Israel may have saved their butts by reworking an already existing architecture (the P6) instead of starting from scratch (the P4). I may be a little off on this, but remember the last time this happened? Intel designed a new chip from scratch, and after cutting their losses, released a new chip which was based off of the old one in some way. Oh yeah, it happened twice . We call them the i432 and i960. The i432 or whatever it was called was eclipsed by the 386, and the i960 was eclipsed by the 486 and Pentium. Intel's biggest failure has been the Itanium. After billions upon billions of dollars, and hiring many of the best compiler people in the business, they've only succeeded in hitting the niche markets. It is also not x86 compatible, and apparently is incredibly hard to program for. The only Itaniums I have heard of run HP-UX or Linux. AMD, on the other hand, took an existing design, worked with it to include HyperTransport links on the chip, and made something which was less expensive to manufacture and had a lower cost for SW development by supporting already-existing tools and environments. Intel tried to go with the bigger and faster route. AMD just made it incredibly attractive to have an Opteron.