>ruins computers

>>105684603 (OP)
What are you talking about? IBM ruined computers by picking the 8086 as the processor for PCs

>>105684628
>LR/SC
>makes it impossible to make obstruction-free algorithms
ARM is stupid. Intel was right.

>>105684603 (OP)
yeah because x86 has so much going for it

just accept that you will be using free and open source chinese risc-v crap.
no chinese ever called me a goyim and charged me interest.

>>105684663
They called you a gwailo and ripped you off with bootlegs instead.

>>105684628
As apposed to what? The 8086 was a pretty decent 16bit cpu.

>>105684736
Z8000 or 68k

>>105684640
Intel hasn't innovated in decades
if arm sucks then intel is even worse now the arm is kicking their ass
what a sorry state of affairs
risc is strolling into an easy victory while the other two are eating paste

>>105684807
Z8000 has primitive, practically worthless segmentation. The 8086 has the best segment model for 16bit cpus. 68k is basically a 32bit cpu.

>>105684898
It's ironic that you mentions it because MS-DOS worked in real mode and was limited to 1MB.

>>105684640
>Intel was right.
shalom rabbi

>>105684736
>The 8086 was a pretty decent 16bit cpu.
I used it. I remember. It wasn't.

>>105685405
Ok, show me a better 16bit cpu that can address more than 64kb of memory. And does so anywhere near as good as the 8086 segment model does.

>>105684603 (OP)
My M2 Mac feels pretty comfy ngl

>>105684603 (OP)
Unlike the UEFI Forum that oversees x86 OEMs and mandates all x86 PCs implement UEFI and allow end users to run any code they want, including bootloaders for any OS they want, ARM allows complete "freedom" for corponigger ARM OEMs to release billions upon billions of completely locked down unserviceable unmaintainable planned obsolescence 5-year-lifespan-maximum ARM devices with zero user freedoms.

When's the last time you saw a functioning ARM computer older than 5 years? How about 10 years?

x86 computers from 1980 are still in use to this day, running trains, power plants, factories, even nuclear missile silos.

UEFI has existed for two decades, BIOS for four decades, ARM has been around nearly that entire time and has outright refused to standardize or mandate a booting system that gives users even a shred of freedom. ARM have sat back for decades and enabled and encouraged ARM OEMs to completely and totally fuck ARM users with planned obsolescence in the name of profits. They have completely infested the mobile industry with their locked down shit ISA and now want to infest the desktop industry as well.

ARM is a cancerous blight on computing whose primary function is to strip away and undermine the ideals and principles of personal computing freedoms and liberties by forcing normies to accept having zero freedoms.

ARM is the single greatest threat to computing freedoms in the history of computers.

Not surprisingly ARM was co-founded and funded by the most freedom-hating globohomonigger corporation in history: Apple.

ARM:
>unlike x86, no generic devices that an OS can target and it just werks. best example: Apple Silicone
>often no unlocked bootloader (example: 99% of smartphones)
>worse performance than x86 (see Phoronix benchmarks)
>unlike RISC-V, or POWER, or even SPARC it's not open and royalty-free
>usually little backward compatibility (e.g. RISC OS not running on newer Raspberry Pis because they're 64-bit-only)


I don't get why anyone would want ARM to succeed or replace x86. It's just going to choke and suffocate FOSS operating systems. Maybe better battery life, but how important is that in the grand scheme of things?

>>105684898
>The 8086 has the best segment model for 16bit cpus
segmentation is an absolute burden and pain the ass that also ate valuable clock cycles. flat memory model was preferred by anyone not retarded. this is why 68k chips were everywhere in all kinds of gear from end of 70s to the late 1990s.
>68k is basically a 32bit cpu.
16/32 bit cpu.

>>105688233
A flat memory 16bit cpu can only address 64kb of ram. If you want more than 64kb out of a 16bit cpu, you need segmentation of some sort. In terms of 16bit cpus, the 8086 segment model was excellent.

Also, consider how the early PC had very little ram. The 68k is not as space efficient as x86. Its instructions take more memory, and its pointers are 32bits, which take more memory also.

>>105684603 (OP)
I bet my m4 pro chip kills all your computers you got

>>105687380
>mandates all x86 PCs implement UEFI
You're thinking of Microsoft. They also require UEFI on ARM.

>>105688339
So how come Snapdragon laptops barely work with Linux

>>105688358
Because they don't put the same effort into Linux support that Intel and AMD do.

>>105687390
I generally agree with your post, arm sucks but
>Apple Silicone

>>105688374
idgi

I'll stick with x86_64