Well yeah, Apple focing those app-developers to compile for AMR helps a lot. Not that the ARM-ecosystem didn't improve a lot before the M1 was announced but Apple pushiing it helped a lot. I never used ARM myself but I can see a future in which we might have more than 1 CPU on our PC-motherboard, ARM for low-power apps which we use all the time, X86 for legacy-support (like gaming), that would be fun.

There's actually Asahi Linux designed for Apple's M1/M2 chips so I thought there was something very different about Apple's chips vs. armV8, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

I've used Ubuntu Mate on the Pi-2, and I can confirm it's very very good.

BSPWM from my debian-titus github project

Bspwm is a great WM that still has a warm place in my heart. My minimalist nature has lead me to DWM with one patch. I started playing with tmux and ended up with mtm because it was easier to use and met my need without a lot of extras. Funny really where life experiences can lead one. Personal tastes and preferences vary so widely from person to person. Anyway, I enjoy watching your videos and seeing your growth and transformation over time. Have fun and take care.

Ideally, yes. But with the current price...

One das probably, Jody 💪

Get the sentiment, but actually no…? Competition between architectures may be a hassle for developers and ecosystems, but is keeping prices down (in a normal world) and innovation up. Even an open platform like RISC-V demands manufacturing in the end, and any “cpu monopoly” will just become expensive for any end user/buyer. That said, I really hope RISC-V will do really well. Just, the “market” must remain a marketplace with options. If one architecture wins it all, it also wins all our money - without us being able to ask a single question… 👍

@@musiqtee Homogenization on x86 ultimately turned out to be a massive benefit for end users. I was alive back in the heyday of the C64 and through the 16-bit era. The biggest problem was that all of these different machines required software to be ported to them and the capabilities and processors were often quite different between them. When IBM clones "won" the personal computer wars and became the _de facto_ standard, we saw exponential development within that segment, with AMD, Cyrix, Chips and Technologies, and VIA all hopping into the ring and competing to develop better implementations of the same platform. Now we're splintering back apart into x86 vs. ARM. ARM is a closed platform and suffers from a host of annoying problems, most notably that there's no standard hardware configuration, control, and self-documentation methodology like ACPI and PCI and DMI on an x86 PC. ARM hardware is often paired with proprietary hardware with closed drivers, thereby locking the hardware to specific aging Linux kernel versions that can never be properly updated. Every new ARM device is technically a totally different platform from nearly every other ARM devices and the stuff like DMI, ACPI, etc. that belongs in the BIOS ends up being stored as a device tree in the kernel instead. ARM is a wild west nightmare. I can boot an x86 or x86-64 Linux kernel on nearly all PCs made since 2000. If I compile an ARM kernel, it can only realistically boot and work completely on the device(s) it's compiled for and has device tree data for. Screw that.

@@JodyBruchon Not that I disagree, but I was 16 when the C64 was released - without making that a shouting contest. Later I’ve used too many CPUs and OSs to count (also for work), and admittedly, some were crap due to poor management or a struggling ecosystem. Point is, the world has moved on. The IT sector (and most others) are heavily financialized, and both the IP and physical fabs instruments of national power. At the same time, edge computing, IoT, cloud and indeed cloudless (local) computing are terms and conditions we wouldn’t think about in 1982 - Nor did Intel, happily licensing away to Cirix and future AMD. Classical economic growth is probably at the end due to general awareness, so we see a scramble for many small CPUs where we saw fewer large multi core ones just a few years back. In other words, geopolitics break up, trust break up - and so do the hegemonies of architectures. This is why even Google is open-sourcing prefab software for independent simple controller SOCs in the 100+ nm category - not the top tier

00:57 Ubuntu-server

@SpookieDude3 Because right now it's software encoding, which is really slow, compared to hardware encoding if you have it available

@SpookieDude3 Wot do you mean why😶 To enable hardware video decode to use GPU except CPU Type chrome://gpu and check what is there ;:

Nothing.

That's literally the whole point tho. Why would you use an old laptop thats gonna cost more in electricity than a cheap arm computer

@@shib5267 but an i3 nuc sips power as well and is x86 compatible.. thats the route I've gone at least, no more high tdp xeons

Cost and Power are the biggest benefits. This space will expand with the success of M1/M2 from Apple. They showed that performance can not only be better than x86, but considerably better while using a fraction of the power.

Price point.

It does

If I have parts, solder paste, a heat gun and some luck would these boards take more RAM?

@@tactileslut it has been done. I saw a video on yt about it but I imagine a bit tricky to do unless an expert at soldering tiny and chips

Yes and it was bad. Debian ARM isn't nearly mature enough or at least the release version I used. I'd rather use ARCH, which is a far cry from the x86 desktop experience.

@@ChrisTitusTech I stand corrected.

Troll comment = nice south-bridge with 4GB SoC = when is the north-bridge coming along.?