Thread 105593357

Why is ARM so shit?

>You can not install an OS you like on it
>Perma cucked
>over 15 ROMs for over 15 different phones with the same (((ARM Processor)))
>Still can not get admit rights
WTF?! ARM is slavery!

2/10

>>105593357 (OP)
>Terminally online, the post.

>>105593357 (OP)
Devicetree bullshit
Binary blobs drivers
Proprietary and undocumented boot sequences which differ for every ARM SoC

>>105593488
>Devicetree bullshit
>Binary blobs drivers
>Proprietary and undocumented boot sequences which differ for every ARM SoC
JESUS christ.
What kind of degenerate cheers for ARM to win? That shit stain is a nightmare!

>>105593357 (OP)
ARM is locked down proprietary shit.

X86 is a standard that allows you to install ANY OS.

POWER, Sparc, LoongArch and RISC-V are truly open ISAs but it remains to be seen if they will be locked down on practice.

>>105593357 (OP)
x86 is the only reason FOSS isnt completely dead yet

>>105593956
power 9 is completely open software wise, you can even compile the microcode, only the chip design is closed.

>>105594034
I wish there was more POWER consumer hardware

>>105593956
>RISC-V are truly open ISAs
Not if you want any kind of performance it isn't.

>>105593395
>stop noticing things goy

>>105593488
x86chads dont have this problem

>>105593357 (OP)
>custom ROM pajeet
kek

>>105593357 (OP)
The fact x86 is exclusively used with standardized hardware is highly abnormal. ARM is not shit, ARM is normal. x86 is weird. No other cpu pretty much ever has become fused to a single platform. Before x86 and standard pc hardware, every machine being unique was the norm. Consider how many different types of machine came with a 68000 cpu.

>>105594078
IBM really dropped the ball with POWER
Even game consoles used to use POWER CPU's, but now no consumer hardware uses them

>>105594590
Which is why it must live on forever

>>105594590
and its one of the reasons x86 reigned as the top dog for decades, that openness allowed for competition, experimentation, innovation.
Its abnormal for ARM to want to return to the old days where that was not the case

>>105593956
An open ISA does not imply any freedom for the user. Open ISAs are good for the manufacturer but do nothing for you. ARM is not even inherently anti-freedom. Nothing stops a manufacture from creating an ARM device with an unlocked boot loader and documented hardware.

>>105594602
not according to freetards

>>105594620
allowing freedom for OEMs is inherently anti-freedom because corponiggers are always anti-freedom
corponiggers should be allowed zero freedoms to dictate how a cpu should run, like on x86 where they instead have to follow uefi forum guidelines on how booting works

>>105593357 (OP)
>You can not install an OS you like on it
Blame the manufacturer for locking the bootloader. They can actually do the same thing on x86 if they want to.
>Perma cucked
Not an argument.
>>over 15 ROMs for over 15 different phones with the same (((ARM Processor)))
Not a thing on devices that have UEFI, ACPI, and good mainline support. Blame the phone/SoC manufacturer, not the ARM core. ARM servers, for example, can usually boot a standard image.
>Still can not get admit rights
Blame the OS, not the CPU.

>>105594611
ARM is not doing anything. ARM is a cpu architecture. Manufacturers are free to use it how they choose. Also, nothing technically stops a manufacturer from creating a fully locked down x86 machine. There is nothing fundamentally about x86 that makes it open, or about ARM that makes it closed. Its purely a case of circumstance, rather than any technical difference between x86 and ARM.

>>105594643
>Blame the manufacturer for locking the bootloader. They can actually do the same thing on x86 if they want to.

Even if the Bootloader was unlocked, doesn't mean the boot process for the device is documented. Every ARM SoC has a different boot process. The Rapberry Pi for example requires you to do funky shit with the GPU since for some reason it handles the boot process

>>105594637
> they instead have to follow uefi forum guidelines on how booting works
Where did you get this nonsense into your head that the uefi forum has any authority to force manufacturers to do anything. Nothing is stopping a manufacturer from making their own proprietary x86 system that is fully locked down.

>>105594656
>Every ARM SoC has a different boot process.
So does every PCH/CPU/Super I/O/EC in an x86 system. The only reason why you can use a standard image is because the firmware handles most of the early initialization. Nothing prevents you from doing so on x86, most servers already do it.

>>105594646
>ARM is not doing anything.
and that's exactly the problem you drooling subhuman nigger
intlel and everyone else maintained standardized modern booting and made it official standard
ARMniggers have sat around for half a century and told end users to fuck off

>>105593357 (OP)
Because those pushing it want locked down devices that they control completely. They think "PCs were a mistake" because it's typical for a x86 to allow you to boot anything. Yes, technically ARM shit can be like that too, kinda, but let's be real: you'll get locked down devices and they'll tell you "that's normal for ARM".