I'm new to building from source, therefore I don't fully understand how it all works. Would it be possible to grab the CyanogenMod sources and build an x86-64 version (both kernel and ROM)? I'm assuming it's not that easy, since I don't see anyone else that's already done this. I understand that the performance gain with x64 may not be substantial at all, but something about using a 32-bit OS on a 64-bit capable device doesn't sit well with me.
There are a lot of posts talking about this.
Yeah, I noticed that, but haven't really gotten any solid information. I didn't really look too hard though. Last night, I tried compiling CM 13 using a couple of guides. Didn't get it to work for the x86-64 version, but was at least able to compile x86 CM. Can anybody provide a solid explanation as to why one cannot simply compile an x86-64 version of an existing ROM? Or was there something I missed?
I also had this doubt, why there are no Open GApps as well their page says - will be available when a capable device gets released...
3.8GB / 4GB, we can have extra multitask power at our disposal, I wonder how does the OP2 fares, does that device have a CM based off 64Bit ?
Ashtrix said:
I also had this doubt, why there are no Open GApps as well their page says - will be available when a capable device gets released...
3.8GB / 4GB, we can have extra multitask power at our disposal, I wonder how does the OP2 fares, does that device have a CM based off 64Bit ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not 100% sure, however, it looks like there's an arm64 version of BlissPop for the OP2. So I wouldn't be surprised if CM is also arm64.
Ashtrix said:
I also had this doubt, why there are no Open GApps as well their page says - will be available when a capable device gets released...
3.8GB / 4GB, we can have extra multitask power at our disposal, I wonder how does the OP2 fares, does that device have a CM based off 64Bit ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is different with the OP2, it is not an x86 processor. ARM64-bit kernels and such are a lot more prevalent. So far there has been no x86_64 bit kernels or roms for any x86 phone, however, we may be seeing one from Asus with the 6.0 launch because Google is dropping x86_32 bit support for future releases.
kaden93 said:
I'm not 100% sure, however, it looks like there's an arm64 version of BlissPop for the OP2. So I wouldn't be surprised if CM is also arm64.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess is, unless N makes it with a new Nexus we won't be having a full 64Bit ecosystem sadly.
Ashtrix said:
My guess is, unless N makes it with a new Nexus we won't be having a full 64Bit ecosystem sadly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's quite a few phones running a 64-bit version of Android, but all of them so far use the arm64 CPU architecture which is completely different from the x86_64 CPU architecture of the Intel Atom CPU within our Zenfones.
So now I guess we need to wait for ASUS to release a 64 Bit kernel soon for a 6.0.x release then we can have our taste of CM13 based on x86_64, and that wait is eternal...
The stock kernel reads 3.10.20 -X86_64 fyi
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
rolfpal said:
The stock kernel reads 3.10.20 -X86_64 fyi
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm also aware of that, but the ROM itself is 32-bit.
The kernel is what determines whether a rom is 32 or 64 bit, a rom is just a collection of files, a 64 bit system may include 32 bit apps ( or even 16 bit in the case of windows ).
My stock (rooted) phone sees all 4 gig of ram, which is a big reason a 64 bit system is desirable. So the stock room is 64 bit.
Likely all of the roms here are also 64 bit, if they are for the zenfone 2, Z00A variant.
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
rolfpal said:
The kernel is what determines whether a rom is 32 or 64 bit, a rom is just a collection of files, a 64 bit system may include 32 bit apps ( or even 16 bit in the case of windows ).
My stock (rooted) phone sees all 4 gig of ram, which is a big reason a 64 bit system is desirable. So the stock room is 64 bit.
Likely all of the roms here are also 64 bit, if they are for the zenfone 2, Z00A variant.
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not quite right, just because u can see all 4 gigs of ram doesn't mean the rom itself is 64 bit.
Yu Yuphoria, for example, uses ARM64 (ARMv8 aarch64) with a simple Snapdragon 410 @1.2GHz and 2GB RAM. Its a low-end hardware, and performs it great. BUT ARMv8 has much more improvements focused in mobile applications than AMD64/Intel EM64T (or, like you say: x86_64). A good example is the doubled NEON instruction size and make it more flexible at coding (it works like SSE for us, processing optimized instructions). It can run two 128 bit NEON instructions/clock. It make performance gains in multimedia apps and games.
This x86_64 instruction set was developed for computers and, obviously, servers (the first processor that supported x86_64 was the AMD Opteron, a server processor). So, the most focus was support more and more RAM, more registers (to support 64 bit words) with backward compatibility with no performance drop when running x86 programs. And (its good to highlight) Intel made the EM64T (its x86_64 implementation) only to make its processors compatible with the systems/program ecosystem made for AMD64 processors (the original 64 bit Intel instruction set was IA64, supported by Itanium processor, not EM64T). So, there is no "fanthastic performance gain" if you compile a ROM in x86_64, simply because the Android run bytecode, and x86_64 never had run Android VM faster as a goal. In fact, the goal wasnt to give a great performance gain even in the computers (except in specific areas, like database processing, 3D rendering, etc). I think before use x86_64 in the whole system, there is more possibilities to optimize easier the system in x86 (like a better use of SSE4 instructions).
Just relax, enjoy your CM13 with the great development that we have, with the awesome FlareM kernel (its testing the real OC now), drink a beer and kiss a pretty girl.
rolfpal said:
The kernel is what determines whether a rom is 32 or 64 bit, a rom is just a collection of files, a 64 bit system may include 32 bit apps ( or even 16 bit in the case of windows ).
My stock (rooted) phone sees all 4 gig of ram, which is a big reason a 64 bit system is desirable. So the stock room is 64 bit.
Likely all of the roms here are also 64 bit, if they are for the zenfone 2, Z00A variant.
Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No ROMs are 64bit. The kernel decides if it can't support a 64bit ROM, it doesn't make the ROM 64bit. Besides there will be next to no performance improvement with a 64bit rom
What if i just want to be able to run 64 bit specific apps on my phone? Dolphin emulator for instance. It works fine on my gs5, but wont load on my zenfone. A 64 bit environment would fix the issue, right?
JeffJonesX2 said:
What if i just want to be able to run 64 bit specific apps on my phone? Dolphin emulator for instance. It works fine on my gs5, but wont load on my zenfone. A 64 bit environment would fix the issue, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S5 aarch64 is ARMv8, not x86_64
Wow. Duh. Sorry n thanks
The kernel itself is x86_64 (like mentioned many times already).
The rom is 32bit because all its components (except the kernel) are compiled that way.
We can't have a full 64bit rom because we can't compile certain parts as 64bit.
The most important one here are the non-free libraries from asus that only have a 32bit version and therefore only 32bit applications can run on top of them.
Any idea why theres not an app compatibility mode on the zenfone 2? Or is that just something someone dreamt?
Related
Dear All,
Can we expect that in future we will have the ROM of win7 for Excalibure?
Thanks
Little something to read regards HD2
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=5351524&postcount=1
As you will see windows mobile 7 hasn't even been developed...
And considering the new phones will only be supported since processors and amount of RAM has changed substantially since the Excalibur, we will probably never see it running on our old beloved devices...
stylez said:
Little something to read regards HD2
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=5351524&postcount=1
As you will see windows mobile 7 hasn't even been developed...
And considering the new phones will only be supported since processors and amount of RAM has changed substantially since the Excalibur, we will probably never see it running on our old beloved devices...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear you!, even though the Dash is still an awesome device, it will be more like a touch pro 2 , or a different new device that will have the 7.0, shoot M$ just released 6.5 not even 4 or 5 months ago, I'm sure it will be a while and, we'll have a beta version of the 7 way before it will be released.
stylez said:
Little something to read regards HD2
As you will see windows mobile 7 hasn't even been developed...
And considering the new phones will only be supported since processors and amount of RAM has changed substantially since the Excalibur, we will probably never see it running on our old beloved devices...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
never say never. we've seen how programmers and cooks have taken windows xp and customized it into usable os's for low end pc's. tiny xp being just one example of this.
so i have full confidence that our cooks here can create a recipe that will be usable on our excaliburs. good luck guys.
I hate to be a downer, but with under 100 MB of ram (68 MB I believe, most of which is used already by the OS and other functions, leaving the user with around 20 MB) and a very small ROM size (newer OS = more space taken) AND a processor clocking in at no more than 250 Mhz OVERCLOCKED, it doesn't seem possible for a Windows 7 ROM to run on our beloved phones.
Notice how with every new OS, the space requirements go up and up (this applies to all devices) whereas XP used somewhere around 6GB I believe and 7 now uses up to 17GB ... If Win7 Mobile proves to be a GREAT (and I mean phenomenal) OS, then there is the chance, but I wouldn't get hopes up too high [especially since our Excaliburs are becoming yesterday's model and chefs are scarce in these parts].
you do relise the newq os takes less space then old xp right? the old xp is so bloated now with updates that if they can slim it down they can slim down win 7 not to mention there is a starter version of 7 made for netbooks, however even the full version runs well on my small netbook, and it has only 1 gig total ram. infact im typing this on my win7 home premium netbook right now.
after a bit of googling i realized you're probably right. the specs required for the new windows mobile 7 OS as reported, will be too much for the excalibur to handle. i still think there are people that could size it down but it would be a job for sure. you'd still need to have those core windows system files.... but as with other OS' they always include bloatware that can be removed to improve functionality. guess we'll have to wait and see...
on the plus side, there is a work in progress attempting to port the new android OS over to the excalibur. it is based on a linux kernal. from what i've read it's bootable but they still have some work to do on it. more on that can be read about here...
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=435934
this will probably be my future OS for this phone when they get it to a workable beta stage. hopefully soon
update: work continued here... vvv.sourceforge.net/apps/trac/wing-linux/wiki
sorry to hijack btw
Cyclonezephyrxz7 said:
I hate to be a downer, but with under 100 MB of ram (68 MB I believe, most of which is used already by the OS and other functions, leaving the user with around 20 MB) and a very small ROM size (newer OS = more space taken) AND a processor clocking in at no more than 250 Mhz OVERCLOCKED, it doesn't seem possible for a Windows 7 ROM to run on our beloved phones.
Notice how with every new OS, the space requirements go up and up (this applies to all devices) whereas XP used somewhere around 6GB I believe and 7 now uses up to 17GB ... If Win7 Mobile proves to be a GREAT (and I mean phenomenal) OS, then there is the chance, but I wouldn't get hopes up too high [especially since our Excaliburs are becoming yesterday's model and chefs are scarce in these parts].
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
stylez said:
Little something to read regards HD2
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=5351524&postcount=1
As you will see windows mobile 7 hasn't even been developed...
And considering the new phones will only be supported since processors and amount of RAM has changed substantially since the Excalibur, we will probably never see it running on our old beloved devices...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
youngdaddytc said:
after a bit of googling i realized you're probably right. the specs required for the new windows mobile 7 OS as reported, will be too much for the excalibur to handle. i still think there are people that could size it down but it would be a job for sure. you'd still need to have those core windows system files.... but as with other OS' they always include bloatware that can be removed to improve functionality. guess we'll have to wait and see...
on the plus side, there is a work in progress attempting to port the new android OS over to the excalibur. it is based on a linux kernal. from what i've read it's bootable but they still have some work to do on it. more on that can be read about here...
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=435934
this will probably be my future OS for this phone when they get it to a workable beta stage. hopefully soon
update: work continued here... vvvv,//sourceforge.net/apps/trac/wing-linux/wiki
sorry to hijack btw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do u think about this video? this device is like HTC Elf which has only 64MB of RAM and 200 MHz of CPU.
Anyways, i hope Windows Mobile 7 can be similar to Windows 7 that can run faster event 1GB of RAM if we compare with Vista.
i think as a company, microsofts target market is the user with a newer smartphone/ppc. i wouldnt be surprised if they had some deal with the cell phone makers that requires you to have to buy a new cell phone to be able to use the newer OS. however, i still hold out hope that the hackers will break down the Mobile OS itself and get it running like a pro.
vid still looks nice though. the date on the upload was 2008 so im sure there has been much work on it since then. beta testing anyone?
youngdaddytc said:
i think as a company, microsofts target market is the user with a newer smartphone/ppc. i wouldnt be surprised if they had some deal with the cell phone makers that requires you to have to buy a new cell phone to be able to use the newer OS. however, i still hold out hope that the hackers will break down the Mobile OS itself and get it running like a pro.
vid still looks nice though. the date on the upload was 2008 so im sure there has been much work on it since then. beta testing anyone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that M$ will require the user to buy new phone with new OS but here, xda site, is ROM testing place before the final product is out on the market.
dolphinxda said:
How do u think about this video? this device is like HTC Elf which has only 64MB of RAM and 200 MHz of CPU.
Anyways, i hope Windows Mobile 7 can be similar to Windows 7 that can run faster event 1GB of RAM if we compare with Vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that a 201MHz CPU /64MB RAM device is more than capable of running WAD Since they can run M2D fine
Info:
Device: HTC Touch (elf)
Skin name: Windows Mobile 7 i3
(i3 = 3 interface)
Skin version: QVGA
Used: WAD2 and WA3
Created by: Bornotty[me] (from scratch of Port'n V2)
Release date: Soon!
its got the 3 different interfaces for your device at one skin, now you can switch by your mood and never get bored with it.
----------------------
sorry for the bad video quality ^_^
Based on Port'n V2 by enCOre special thanx to somjait for converting it into qvga
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha Stylez, I was just about to comment on that video.
Regarding the user who mentioned that Win7 is smaller than XP, I would like you to double-check that, or maybe check it for the first time, becuase I am more than 99% sure that due to the immense amount of Hardware Acceleration and other optimizational code in the Win7 core, the size of it is larger than XP. You can see this also by the fact that Win7 asks if you want to make a partition for the OS alone (which turns out to be 16-17GB) while XP (which I have installed on my own HDD) takes up no more than 18GB on my 75GB HDD and that is with all my usual apps installed (3Ds Max, Visual Studio (Full), Adobe suite ALTERNATIVES, Firewall/AV, plus all the other random freeware I tend to install for the heck of it) [I estimated around 6-7 because of the apps installed]...Also realize that the hacked XP (coined MiniXP) fits on a CD, so OBVIOUSLY there was enough to take out that it could shrink down immensely and still keep its functions... So i am pretty sure than XP doesn't take too much space...
SEMI-EDIT:: I left this window open and forgot to post, so i googled the size of an XP installation...refer to http://www.computing.net/answers/windows-xp/size-of-xp-install/154115.html where people claim to install XP with only 1.5GB of HDD....i think that settles that...
Cyclonezephyrxz7 said:
Haha Stylez, I was just about to comment on that video.
Regarding the user who mentioned that Win7 is smaller than XP, I would like you to double-check that, or maybe check it for the first time, becuase I am more than 99% sure that due to the immense amount of Hardware Acceleration and other optimizational code in the Win7 core, the size of it is larger than XP. You can see this also by the fact that Win7 asks if you want to make a partition for the OS alone (which turns out to be 16-17GB) while XP (which I have installed on my own HDD) takes up no more than 18GB on my 75GB HDD and that is with all my usual apps installed (3Ds Max, Visual Studio (Full), Adobe suite ALTERNATIVES, Firewall/AV, plus all the other random freeware I tend to install for the heck of it) [I estimated around 6-7 because of the apps installed]...Also realize that the hacked XP (coined MiniXP) fits on a CD, so OBVIOUSLY there was enough to take out that it could shrink down immensely and still keep its functions... So i am pretty sure than XP doesn't take too much space...
SEMI-EDIT:: I left this window open and forgot to post, so i googled the size of an XP installation...refer to http://www.computing.net/answers/windows-xp/size-of-xp-install/154115.html where people claim to install XP with only 1.5GB of HDD....i think that settles that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol spot on all you need to do is notice XP Pro comes on CD & Windows 7 on DVD.. There is a reason for that
Also my XP Pro SP3 Slipstream comes in @ 1.3GB after i remove the page file "solidstate disk" so 3.3GB before
Windows 7 comes in from 5.5GB+
I don't think that it will ever get to run on the dash, just because all of the animation, interfaces, plugin's, and all the ram that's gonna be needed for newer OS's.
I'm only speaking my opinion, but aren't almost all new Win Mo devices coming out with touch screens. I think if there was any older device that would get a version of WM 7 will be the Htc Tilt/Kaiser that has 112mb storage and 101mb ram, or the Htc Fuze/Raphael that has even more, around 294mb storage and 187mb ram.
I think that it would be awesome if someone would have that much skills to make it happen but, like TouchFLO on dash never happened, Android has been on the works since october 2008 and still hasn't happened.
But anyways who knows!
I just found this vid about WinMo7 .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAVg2z-SCw4&feature=related
found a very recent report on it, read up! http://wmpoweruser.com/?p=12237
Also read this thread, I think Fuze has more of a chance on getting this. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=618567
roloracer said:
found a very recent report on it, read up! http://wmpoweruser.com/?p=12237
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All speculation we have very well informed user that is stating it's based on Ce Os 7
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=620477
Think the Kaiser will be left behind due to the lack of storage space and also think accelerometer gyrator going to come into play alot more with WM7 from what been reading.
But like i say all speculation, one thing i can say is the Excalibur won't as it's just too slow too small "not regards size" and it's turned out that HTC now are really a PPC adventure even though they have SP's still in the market place....
Oh i love speculation but is till have an extra kidney if need to place bets
Oh 1 more time speculation
stylez said:
Oh 1 more time speculation
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, speculation!
Hey Stylez! check out the youtube video I posted, and take a look at the phone the chick has running WM7 on the 1 minute and 14 second mark..
roloracer said:
Yep, speculation!
Hey Stylez! check out the youtube video I posted, and take a look at the phone the chick has running WM7 on the 1 minute and 14 second mark..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eazy roloracer,
Yeah it's an advert future concept cloud network. But i can see the likely hood of porting since it's still very well specked and people are stating the snapdragon doesn't add an amazing amount of difference in feel from the Qualcomm MSM750xx, but we will all have to wait and see.
Good ol speculation
keepin the fingers crossed
youngdaddytc said:
keepin the fingers crossed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep more than your fingers crossed "it's not going to happen if you look @ all the videos floating around it's highly gui intensive" unless they bring out a version for SP that can work on very old equipment to which considering all SP's are now about 500MHz and have far more storage & RAM it's highly unlikely...
Considering the CPU architecture (Tecra 3) would it be possible to get a port of Windows 8 running on it?
c_marius said:
Considering the CPU architecture (Tecra 3) would it be possible to get a port of Windows 8 running on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess it would technically be possible to run Windows 8 (ARM) on it.
Assuming you mean Windows 8 OS and not Windows phone 8, It would be very unlikely as there are too many factors as to why this would not work. For starters the windows 8 kernel would need to be heavily modified in order to work on the HOX architecture, also which windows os relays on stock driver support in order for it to function so someone would also need to write drivers for the hardware support too.
It would be more likely possible to port Windows phone 8 since it is designed for phones in mind from the get go. Windows phone 8 is a heavily modified version of the windows 8 OS.
c_marius said:
Considering the CPU architecture (Tecra 3) would it be possible to get a port of Windows 8 running on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Short answer No. Unlike Android Microsoft is not open source also you won't get source codes or Kernel sources etc. for the Devs to build one.
Well... although it's highly unlikely if Windows 8 is released and Tegra 3 is still the flagship CPU from NVIDIA the possibility of a port may increase slightly (Only if a Tegra 3 powered Win8 tablet is produced)
May be chances are higher side.
ShyamSasi said:
Short answer No. Unlike Android Microsoft is not open source also you won't get source codes or Kernel sources etc. for the Devs to build one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And probably illegal?
Guys, both Windows Mobile 8 and Windows RT (8) will be available for ARM processors, it's more a case of porting drivers than modifying the kernel. Of course we would need to develop a new bootloader to feed Windows 8 (mobile or not) device information the way it wants it.
Rekoil said:
Guys, both Windows Mobile 8 and Windows RT (8) will be available for ARM processors, it's more a case of porting drivers than modifying the kernel. Of course we would need to develop a new bootloader to feed Windows 8 (mobile or not) device information the way it wants it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which would require s-off?
Sent from my HTC One X.
This is android. We have freewill, free to modify, change and improve but we do not steal.
treebill said:
Which would require s-off?
Sent from my HTC One X.
This is android. We have freewill, free to modify, change and improve but we do not steal.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S-OFF would no doubt help make the solution more elegant, but it is certainly not necessary.
Rekoil said:
S-OFF would no doubt help make the solution more elegant, but it is certainly not necessary.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is good to hear well either way you would need to have a windows 8 serial and that means buying it, these forums don't support that sort of stuff.
Sent from HTC One X.
This is android. We free to modify, change and improve but we do not steal.
Hey guys
I love its design,but I know windows RT does not support X86 apps. This is my concern.Compared to app store, windows market sucks.I recently learnt that there is a way to root windows RT and make it launch x86 apps. Did anyone try? Can I launch full version chrome or XBMC on rooted windows RT?
Alexsandra said:
Hey guys
I love its design,but I know windows RT does not support X86 apps. This is my concern.Compared to app store, windows market sucks.I recently learnt that there is a way to root windows RT and make it launch x86 apps. Did anyone try? Can I launch full version chrome or XBMC on rooted windows RT?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all, this belongs in Surface General, not RT development. Secondly, there is a thread where you can see what apps have been tried, and how they worked (don't expect much at all right now): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2095934 also realize that development is ongoing. There is also a thread for native app ports: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2092348
I personally recommend the Surface very much if you are a student (Office is preloaded) and don't NEED to run any desktop apps, like Photoshop. Go for it!
C-Lang said:
First of all, this belongs in Surface General, not RT development. Secondly, there is a thread where you can see what apps have been tried, and how they worked (don't expect much at all right now): http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2095934 also realize that development is ongoing. There is also a thread for native app ports: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2092348
I personally recommend the Surface very much if you are a student (Office is preloaded) and don't NEED to run any desktop apps, like Photoshop. Go for it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. I am not a student. I just want to try a new style stuff. I own a iPad2,but you know it doesn't work like a real laptop.
Alexsandra said:
Did anyone try? Can I launch full version chrome or XBMC on rooted windows RT?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Estimated x86 performance is about 0.1Ghz. Microsoft DOS era basically. So no, chrome and XBMC will not work via x86 emulation. Notepad or something along the lines of the original doom *may* work.
The jailbreak does not allow running of x86 programs. It allows running on 3rd party applications on the desktop of which just one is an x86 emulator.
Your best hope is for chromium (open source builds of chrome) or XBMC to be ported to RT natively. Chromium is definitely being worked on but has a huge list of dependencies and is an incredibly complicated piece of software believe it or not. XBMC I honestly have no idea if anyone is working on that, it also has a horrific list of dependancies I think.
x86 emulation on RT is awesome but your best bet is for people to release native ARM builds for applications and they will be far and few in between. If you dont want to wait for that then look at an intel atom powered tablet running full windows 8.
Surface
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Estimated x86 performance is about 0.1Ghz. Microsoft DOS era basically. So no, chrome and XBMC will not work via x86 emulation. Notepad or something along the lines of the original doom *may* work.
The jailbreak does not allow running of x86 programs. It allows running on 3rd party applications on the desktop of which just one is an x86 emulator.
Your best hope is for chromium (open source builds of chrome) or XBMC to be ported to RT natively. Chromium is definitely being worked on but has a huge list of dependencies and is an incredibly complicated piece of software believe it or not. XBMC I honestly have no idea if anyone is working on that, it also has a horrific list of dependancies I think.
x86 emulation on RT is awesome but your best bet is for people to release native ARM builds for applications and they will be far and few in between. If you dont want to wait for that then look at an intel atom powered tablet running full windows 8.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or go with a Surface Pro and you can have everything you want
SixSixSevenSeven said:
Your best hope is for chromium (open source builds of chrome) or XBMC to be ported to RT natively. Chromium is definitely being worked on but has a huge list of dependencies and is an incredibly complicated piece of software believe it or not. XBMC I honestly have no idea if anyone is working on that, it also has a horrific list of dependancies I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
XBMC requires a number of libraries that only build with GCC.
forget about it
I have already given up RT device after I read your replies. It looks like that Surface pro is my best option,but it doesnt have slim body and long-lasting battery(compared to iPad,it sucks). I dont think of any atom device due to its poor performance. Hoping one day surface pro could be a amazing device that owns slim body and long-lasting battery and high performance.
Atom CPUs will generally perform similarly or slightly better than ARM ones (iPads, incidentally, use ARM, as does Windows RT). I believe there are benchmarks that you can use to compare the performance of different tablets, including the iPad and various Atom models, if performance is such a concern to you.
Alexsandra said:
I have already given up RT device after I read your replies. It looks like that Surface pro is my best option,but it doesnt have slim body and long-lasting battery(compared to iPad,it sucks). I dont think of any atom device due to its poor performance. Hoping one day surface pro could be a amazing device that owns slim body and long-lasting battery and high performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could definitely go with an atom device. They will have enough power for everyday tasks (unless you use something like PhotoShop). Also I've seen videos and benchmarks, and it boots faster, and runs at about equivalent speed as Windows RT. Good luck in your search! :fingers-crossed: Oh, and the best thing you could do is walk into a Microsoft store and try everything out! :good:
Even the cedar trail atoms seem pretty competitive performance wise with my 5 year old laptop (which does get the usual disk cleanups, defrags and removal of any bloat I find etc). Let alone the clover trails in these windows 8 tablets. Took my laptop round a mates to compare with his netbook, found that the cedar trail was universally slower which was obvious but by surprisingly negligible amounts. Minecraft had a 2fps difference, Visual studio for the same solution file took 0.2 seconds longer to compile, boot times were identical, time to load a 5000 character open office document (same one of course) in libre office was immeasurably different.
1.6ghz dual core with hyper threading and 2gb of RAM vs a 2ghz intel celeron single core without any hyperthreading and 3gb of RAM (well, Its registered in windows as not having hyperthreading, there isnt a bios option for it either). Both were of course using the normal intel integrated graphics.
Honestly, people say that the atom is slow, celeron must also be slow (which it probably is, mine is 5 years old and was hardly cutting edge at the time).
Personally I am looking at getting an intel atom powered device, unless someone manages to release an i5 device with a decent battery at a low price which they won't, besides, I dont need that boost in power. Everything that does need that much power I can do on my desktop.
Hi guys,
I've read in the Motorola forums (if you can call that mess a forum, ugh) that the Moto E 2nd Gen LTE "only" runs in 32-bit mode instead of 64-bit.
How can that be if the OS (Lollipop and Marshmallow) are both 64-bit OSs? Did Motorola exchange the kernel with a 32-bit one?
I get why they decided to let the phone run in 32- bit. Still, seems pretty odd to me to build a phone designed for a 64-bit OS and deliberately let it run in 32-bit mode.
Waste of potential, if you ask me.
Has someone more/better info on this?
Someone asked about it and got this answer:
UserDemos said:
Does the Moto E LTE (2nd Gen.) run 64-bit Android or does it run 32-bit? The Snapdragon 410 is 64-bit compatible, however it can run in either mode. What is Motorola running on the Moto E LTE (2nd Gen.)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Matt (Forums Manager) said:
It runs 32-bit mode for best use of memory, compatibility and performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn, wrong forum. Sorry, guys. Can please move it to Q&A? Thanks!
I made a mistake. Thought Lollipop was a 64-bit OS, but it is 32-bit. Now it makes sense. My bad. Thread can be closed.
Both Lollipop and Marshmallow can be either 32 bit or 64 bit. In the case of Moto E, we use 32 bit mainly because of the lack of RAM (1GB).
While I agree with you that Snapdragon 410 was meant to be used with 64 bit OS, the performance difference between 32 bit and 64 bit would be very little (even if Moto E had 2GB RAM).
64 bit architectures were recently introduced to mobile devices in order to exceed the 3GB RAM wall. In other words a 32 bit OS (or CPU) can not handle more than 3GB of RAM.
To sum up, our Moto E will probably never get a 64 bit OS, because the performance will be much worse.
Thanks for the answer. That cleared up a lot of stuff. So when it runs on 32 bit will I still be able to experience the new features of ARMv8?
No because kernel is only armv7.
So it's totally pointless then to build a smartphone with a 64-bit CPU in this case *facepalm*
there is no other chip like that with 32 bit only, every sd410 phone with less than 2gb of ram is 32 bit only so it's not a bad decison. If cpu support something it doesn't mean that you will get that in low end phone.
Title says it all. It would be a great way to inject more life and cool factor into our beloved tabs!
I agree!
I also concur
Would be amazing.
Should we start a pool? I'd be willing to contribute $30
I like the 3:2 ratio so I'm not going to get an s4
pacorola said:
Title says it all. It would be a great way to inject more life and cool factor into our beloved tabs!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a Dex dock and I used to have a Galaxy S8+. Dex is not useful, and it’s less useful if you have a tablet.
Android still doesn’t have a decent tablet mode, and as you can see from the Pixel Touch, running Android apps in a desktop-like environment doesn’t work well.
Many companies have tried to make Android run as a desktop-like OS, and it just isn’t designed for it.
All I want is full desktop Chrome and Multi window
Xero3g said:
All I want is full desktop Chrome and Multi window
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Desktop Chrome runs like a dog on desktop processors with tons of RAM, why would you want it on a tablet? That's a terrible idea.
dragon_76 said:
Desktop Chrome runs like a dog on desktop processors with tons of RAM, why would you want it on a tablet? That's a terrible idea.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems to run perfectly fine on Chromebooks
Xero3g said:
Seems to run perfectly fine on Chromebooks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the only thing you are running is the browser, and nothing else (including background tasks), then it runs OK. But Chromebooks aren't selling. So...
dragon_76 said:
If the only thing you are running is the browser, and nothing else (including background tasks), then it runs OK. But Chromebooks aren't selling. So...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just bought a Chromebook. Same m3 processor as my surface pro 4. Runs chrome, Android, Linux, and chrome apps simultaneously just fine. Better in some cases than my surface book 2.
Xero3g said:
Just bought a Chromebook. Same m3 processor as my surface pro 4. Runs chrome, Android, Linux, and chrome apps simultaneously just fine. Better in some cases than my surface book 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have a Dell Inspiron 14 and while I like it for just goofing around on the net, it's app support is pretty limited.
First, Linux only runs on certain Chromebooks and that will not be changing because Google uses ancient versions of the Linux kernel. So unless you have a newer Chromebook, no Linux.
Second, there's no way for Linux or Android apps to access USB or the SD card, and there's no hardware graphics acceleration for them. While that might be changing soon, it's not currently in 72. That's a big deal when most Chromebooks top out at 32GB-64GB of storage and they already have anemic processors for graphics.
Lastly, if a Linux or Android app crashes, it brings the entire system down. It's like running macOS Classic.
dragon_76 said:
I have a Dell Inspiron 14 and while I like it for just goofing around on the net, it's app support is pretty limited.
First, Linux only runs on certain Chromebooks and that will not be changing because Google uses ancient versions of the Linux kernel. So unless you have a newer Chromebook, no Linux.
Second, there's no way for Linux or Android apps to access USB or the SD card, and there's no hardware graphics acceleration for them. While that might be changing soon, it's not currently in 72. That's a big deal when most Chromebooks top out at 32GB-64GB of storage and they already have anemic processors for graphics.
Lastly, if a Linux or Android app crashes, it brings the entire system down. It's like running macOS Classic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Worked fine for my use case, light and capable travel laptop that I can use for work when I need to. Much as I enjoy it, my surface book 2 is too much to carry across three countries for a month. Didn't have and space issues (though I have multiple 400gb mSD cards). The Chromebook did fine and really I suppose if I needed to do more serious work I could just dual boot Linux itself. I have been wanting to try out Deepin...