www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Mobile is the new PC and AArch64 is the new x64

reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main branches 
and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out for both 
linux and Android. It does not seem that many are paying 
attention to this sea change that is going on with computing 
though, so let me lay out some evidence.

At my workplace six years ago, the developers were all allocated 
a core i5 ultrabook- likely with 4 GBs of RAM and a 128 GB SSD, 
though I don't remember those specs- and a 27" 2560X1440 display 
with which to get our work done. I was pretty happy with the 
display, the best I'd ever used to that point. I'm guessing the 
setup cost my employer a couple thousand dollars per developer.

I picked up an Android/AArch64 smartphone earlier this year, with 
6 GBs of RAM, 128 GBs of flash, a Snapdragon 835 octa-core CPU, 
and a 5.5" 2560X1440 display. This is the fastest computer I've 
ever owned, and it fits in 6 cubic inches and weighs a little 
more than a third of a pound. It cost me approximately $700.

That is a stunning change in mobile capabilities in just six 
years, where what used to be a mobile developer workstation now 
comes packed into a smartphone at a fraction of the cost.

If you think the phone doesn't actually perform, I borrowed a 
2015-model Macbook Air with a core i5 and 4 GBs of RAM and built 
the last pure C++ version of ldc, 0.17, using both cores with 
`-ninja -j5`. It took two minutes with clang from Homebrew, the 
same amount of time it takes me to build the same source on my 
smartphone with clang by running `ninja -j9`.

This phone has been my development hardware since early this 
year, by pairing it with a $30 bluetooth keyboard and a $5 stand 
to hold it up. I'm typing this long forum post up on it now.

Tech companies are starting to realize this and going after the 
desktop/laptop PC markets with various 64-bit ARM products:

https://www.engadget.com/2018/08/09/samsung-galaxy-note-9-dex/
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/samsungs-tab-s4-is-both-an-android-tablet-and-a-desktop-computer/
https://youtube.com/watch?v=uLvIAskVSUM
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13309/lenovo-yoga-c630-snapdragon-850-windows

That last link notes 25 hours of battery life with a 
Windows/AArch64 laptop, one of the key benefits of ARM, which is 
why even Microsoft has come around.

Yes, I know, these devices won't replace your quad-core Xeon 
workstation with 32-64 GBs of RAM anytime soon, but most people 
don't need anywhere near that level of compute. That's why PC 
sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X that per year:

https://www.businessinsider.com/PC-sales-are-continuing-to-slump-fewer-are-sold-now-than-when-the-iPhone-launched/articleshow/62547330.cms
https://www.androidauthority.com/smartphone-sales-idc-2018-871363/

Most of those mobile devices running iOS have AArch64 CPUs, and 
google said last December that "over 40% of Android devices 
coming online have 64-bit support," which is why they're 
requiring apps with native libraries to support it by next fall:

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/12/improving-app-security-and-performance.html

D now has mostly working AArch64 support, with the ldc 1.11 
release last month:

https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.11.0

That is the result of years of intermittent AArch64 patches added 
by the core teams of ldc and gdc- David, Iain, Kai, Johannes, 
Dan, and others- to which I recently added some Android patches. 
You too can pitch in with the few remaining issues or try out the 
AArch64 support with your own D code.

This company provides a free linux/AArch64 CI for OSS projects, 
LDC uses it:

http://blog.shippable.com/shippable-arm-packet-deliver-native-ci-cd-for-arm-architecture

Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or AArch64, 
even though I think it's well-suited for that market. But at the 
very least, you should be looking at mobile and AArch64, as 
they're taking over the computing market.
Sep 10 2018
next sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 10 September 2018 at 15:43, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main branches and 64-bit
 ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out for both linux and Android. It
 does not seem that many are paying attention to this sea change that is
 going on with computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.
I've just got back from a conference where AArch64 was declared a disaster, and the future is now PPC64 and RISC-V.
Sep 10 2018
next sibling parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 14:00:43 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 10 September 2018 at 15:43, Joakim via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.
I've just got back from a conference where AArch64 was declared a disaster
Why?
 and the future is now PPC64 and RISC-V.
If you're not joking, it still stands that AArch64 is the _present_, as the currently most widely-deployed CPU arch used for personal computing, ie in mobile devices. Those other two arches are a joke right now, but you never know in the future. ARM was a joke compared to Intel a couple decades ago too. ;)
Sep 10 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 14:00:43 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 PPC64
Why superscalar is a thing at all? Didn't Itanium prove to be difficult to optimize for?
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling parent reply Per =?UTF-8?B?Tm9yZGzDtnc=?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 14:00:43 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 I've just got back from a conference where AArch64 was declared 
 a disaster, and the future is now PPC64 and RISC-V.
References, please! :)
Nov 10 2018
parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On Sat, 10 Nov 2018 at 16:25, Per Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 14:00:43 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 I've just got back from a conference where AArch64 was declared
 a disaster, and the future is now PPC64 and RISC-V.
References, please! :)
Pub, Manchester. If you weren't there, you missed out. ;-) -- Iain
Nov 10 2018
parent Per =?UTF-8?B?Tm9yZGzDtnc=?= <per.nordlow gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 15:27:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 Pub, Manchester. If you weren't there, you missed out. ;-)
;) Ok, until next time.
Nov 10 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Claude <no no.no> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or 
 AArch64, even though I think it's well-suited for that market. 
 But at the very least, you should be looking at mobile and 
 AArch64, as they're taking over the computing market.
Coming from ARM system programming for embedded systems, I'm also looking into AArch64. Having done some x86 assembly, ARM assembly was a bliss, and AArch64 looks even better! I also wish D will do well for embedded systems. Most of the system developers I know program in C, and do very little C++ for it becomes unmaintainable (unless you enforce strict coding rules: like using it like "C with class" with very little template). C is straigthforward and gets the job done (ie. Vulkan - as a quite recent API - was written in C, not C++. So D would do so good! That's why I think "BetterC" is a good strategic move (in the long run) even though I understand people coming from Java/Python background might not get it at all. If we have a BetterConst (I'm referring to Jonathan Davis article: http://jmdavisprog.com/articles/why-const-sucks.html ), I think D would be even greater.
Sep 10 2018
parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 15:06:46 UTC, Claude wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or 
 AArch64, even though I think it's well-suited for that market. 
 But at the very least, you should be looking at mobile and 
 AArch64, as they're taking over the computing market.
Coming from ARM system programming for embedded systems, I'm also looking into AArch64. Having done some x86 assembly, ARM assembly was a bliss, and AArch64 looks even better! I also wish D will do well for embedded systems.
Radu has done good work getting D working with uClibc, for example with OpenWRT: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/2810 yshui added a Musl port too, which can be used with the Alpine build of ldc available at the above ldc 1.11 link. There have been a couple reports of companies trying to use ldc for this, but there are likely still bugs that need to be ironed out.
Sep 10 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply rjframe <dlang ryanjframe.com> writes:
On Mon, 10 Sep 2018 13:43:46 +0000, Joakim wrote:

 Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or AArch64,
 even though I think it's well-suited for that market. But at the very
 least, you should be looking at mobile and AArch64, as they're taking
 over the computing market.
I was talking with a local businessperson the other day who noted that there are young people walking around right now that never have (and likely never will) own a laptop.
Sep 10 2018
parent reply aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 16:09:41 UTC, rjframe wrote:
 On Mon, 10 Sep 2018 13:43:46 +0000, Joakim wrote:

 Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or 
 AArch64, even though I think it's well-suited for that market. 
 But at the very least, you should be looking at mobile and 
 AArch64, as they're taking over the computing market.
I was talking with a local businessperson the other day who noted that there are young people walking around right now that never have (and likely never will) own a laptop.
That's exactly whats happening in Africa. The continent is leapfrogging from nothing to a smart phone thanks to China. Many don'[t know how to even use a PC. Especially the young and upcoming generation. The smart phone market is really significant.
Sep 10 2018
parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 19:28:01 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 16:09:41 UTC, rjframe wrote:
 That's exactly whats happening in Africa. The continent is 
 leapfrogging from nothing to a smart phone thanks to China. 
 Many don'[t know how to even use a PC. Especially the young and 
 upcoming generation.

 The smart phone market is really significant.
That's why I'm trying to draw attention to first class ARM support by the D Foundation (not just some voluntary efforts, much as they are appreciated). ARM in dmd wouldn't be a bad idea perhaps, as Manu suggested. It's become more than obvious over the last couple of years that mobile devices have become very important and that people often use them instead of PCs or laptops. Fewer and fewer developers can "escape" development for mobile ("we want an app too"), and if a language doesn't offer first class support for mobile, then devs won't bother with it. A lot of other (new) languages are directing their efforts towards mobile for a reason.
Sep 10 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 06:42:26 UTC, Chris wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 19:28:01 UTC, aberba wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 16:09:41 UTC, rjframe wrote:
 That's exactly whats happening in Africa. The continent is 
 leapfrogging from nothing to a smart phone thanks to China. 
 Many don'[t know how to even use a PC. Especially the young 
 and upcoming generation.

 The smart phone market is really significant.
That's why I'm trying to draw attention to first class ARM support by the D Foundation (not just some voluntary efforts, much as they are appreciated). ARM in dmd wouldn't be a bad idea perhaps, as Manu suggested. It's become more than obvious over the last couple of years that mobile devices have become very important and that people often use them instead of PCs or laptops. Fewer and fewer developers can "escape" development for mobile ("we want an app too"), and if a language doesn't offer first class support for mobile, then devs won't bother with it. A lot of other (new) languages are directing their efforts towards mobile for a reason.
I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I'm not sure what you mean by "first class support for mobile." What exactly do you believe D needs to reach that level? I think most of the heavy lifting with core language and stdlib support is done. What remains is polish and integration for the build process and possibly IDEs and of course, making sure there are D libraries to make mobile dev easier. I will be sporadically polishing the build process over the coming months, by getting much more building through dub. I won't be doing anything with IDEs, as I don't use them. As for libraries, that all depends on what you're doing and how much others in the D community want that too. It might be a good idea to set up a funding target to get the iOS port back up to speed again. I don't use Apple products so it won't be me picking up that porting work, but maybe Dan could be enticed to finish it as a paid project, since he did most of the voluntary work so far. I'm purely speculating, no idea if money changes the equation for him, just know that he's been too busy to work on it for the last couple years.
Sep 11 2018
next sibling parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:23:53 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I'm not sure what 
 you mean by "first class support for mobile." What exactly do 
 you believe D needs to reach that level?
Basically the things you describe. I was thinking of a stable and easy build system, e.g. $ dub init android [iOS] $ dub --arch=arm64 And and of course check which language features work (or don't work!) on ARM and write a documentation. Cf. https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/native-overview.html The thing is that D already has a lot of useful stuff like C/C++ and Objective-C interop. It would be a pity if we didn't use it.
 I think most of the heavy lifting with core language and stdlib 
 support is done. What remains is polish and integration for the 
 build process and possibly IDEs and of course, making sure 
 there are D libraries to make mobile dev easier.

 I will be sporadically polishing the build process over the 
 coming months, by getting much more building through dub. I 
 won't be doing anything with IDEs, as I don't use them.

 As for libraries, that all depends on what you're doing and how 
 much others in the D community want that too.

 It might be a good idea to set up a funding target to get the 
 iOS port back up to speed again. I don't use Apple products so 
 it won't be me picking up that porting work, but maybe Dan 
 could be enticed to finish it as a paid project, since he did 
 most of the voluntary work so far. I'm purely speculating, no 
 idea if money changes the equation for him, just know that he's 
 been too busy to work on it for the last couple years.
That'd be part of the first class support. That a dedicated team works on it. Volunteers are not enough. Once it's polished it will still need loads of maintenance.
Sep 11 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 08:34:31 UTC, Chris wrote:
 On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:23:53 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I'm not sure what 
 you mean by "first class support for mobile." What exactly do 
 you believe D needs to reach that level?
Basically the things you describe. I was thinking of a stable and easy build system, e.g. $ dub init android [iOS] $ dub --arch=arm64
Yes, something like that should be done, but I won't be doing much with dub till next year. If anyone else is interested in doing it earlier, feel free.
 And and of course check which language features work (or don't 
 work!) on ARM and write a documentation.

 Cf. https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/native-overview.html
I don't see any language features listed for Kotlin there, but ldc does have an AArch64 tracker issue, which lists what else needs to be done: https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/issues/2153
 It might be a good idea to set up a funding target to get the 
 iOS port back up to speed again. I don't use Apple products so 
 it won't be me picking up that porting work, but maybe Dan 
 could be enticed to finish it as a paid project, since he did 
 most of the voluntary work so far. I'm purely speculating, no 
 idea if money changes the equation for him, just know that 
 he's been too busy to work on it for the last couple years.
That'd be part of the first class support. That a dedicated team works on it. Volunteers are not enough. Once it's polished it will still need loads of maintenance.
I don't think there's a "dedicated team" for any platform that D runs on, so we don't have "first class support" for any platform then. D is largely a volunteer effort: if that's not enough, maybe D isn't right for you. This isn't Kotlin or Swift, where one of the largest companies in the world puts full-time devs on the language and gives everything away for free because it suits their agenda. In Apple's case, that means Swift doesn't really support Android and definitely doesn't support Android/AArch64, because putting full-time devs on getting Swift working well with Android doesn't suit their agenda of pushing iOS: https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/Android.md https://blog.readdle.com/why-we-use-swift-for-android-db449feeacaf However, since Swift is largely open source, there is a small company that claims to have added Android/AArch64 support to the Swift compiler: https://www.scade.io Kotlin is becoming more cross-platform now since google is more cross-platform, but then you're depending on google continually funding development on an OSS project, which they've backed out of before: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ I don't fault google for making those choices, as nobody has a right to their OSS contributions, but it is something to consider when using any platform, and even more so for an OSS project: who is funding this and why? Will their model be sustainable? There are no easy answers here: if you want a free-priced, OSS toolchain, you're going to be marching to the beat of someone's drum. As for ongoing maintenance, Android/ARM was done years ago and hasn't taken much in the way of maintenance to keep most of the stdlib/dmd tests passing, so I don't think that's much of an issue. btw, it was a thread _you_ started that finally spurred me to begin this Android port five years back, though I'd enquired about and had been considering it earlier: https://forum.dlang.org/thread/yhulkqvlwnxjklnogmfv forum.dlang.org On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 16:50:33 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence. ...
I mostly agree with you, Joakim. I own a very nice (but now old) ODROID U2 (check the ODROID XU4 or C2!) so ARM support is important for me... Also, check this: https://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G152875062626 HOWEVER, I think Iain is right - PPC64 and RISC-V are becoming more and more popular nowadays and may become more popular than ARM in the future but that future is unclear.
If and when they do, I'm sure D and other languages will be ported to them, but right now they're most definitely not. I know because I actually looked for a RISC-V VPS on which to port ldc and found nothing. Conversely, I was able to rent out an ARM Cubieboard2 remotely four years back when I was first getting ldc going on ARM: https://forum.dlang.org/post/steigfwkywotxsyppvza forum.dlang.org I contacted one of the few companies putting out RISC-V dev boards, Sifive, a couple weeks ago with the suggestion of making available a paid RISC-V VPS, and one of their field engineers got back to me last week with a note that they're looking into it. I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary extensions will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a similar model has basically won already for software, but that doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one to do it. Someone else might execute that model better. On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 21:37:17 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
 On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:23:53 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I'm not sure what 
 you mean by "first class support for mobile." What exactly do 
 you believe D needs to reach that level?
Natural-feeling bindings to platform libraries that are not incredibly slow and that are well-maintained. What does it matter that you can run a webserver from your phone if you can't write a "hello world" GUI program, set an alarm, or enqueue a download?
There are those who run the webserver as an app and reuse their webapp as a mobile app, since mobile always comes with a webview or browser. You can now do that with your vibe.d web app if you choose, I'd say that matters. I don't think any other platform D supports has the type of "well-maintained" bindings you're asking for either, hasn't stopped those that want to use D. I've got a bit better than "hello world," though that's there too, in the sample D apps in my android repo and the instructions in the wiki: https://github.com/joakim-noah/android/tree/master/samples https://wiki.dlang.org/Build_D_for_Android
Sep 12 2018
next sibling parent reply Dejan Lekic <dejan.lekic gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I contacted one of the few companies putting out RISC-V dev 
 boards, Sifive, a couple weeks ago with the suggestion of 
 making available a paid RISC-V VPS, and one of their field 
 engineers got back to me last week with a note that they're 
 looking into it.

 I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary 
 extensions will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a 
 similar model has basically won already for software, but that 
 doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one to do it. Someone else 
 might execute that model better.
I could not agree more - look at Parallella! Their model is the same yet it ultimately failed (unfortunately as I think Exynos is seriously good stuff)! :(
Sep 12 2018
parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 12 September 2018 at 10:46, Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I contacted one of the few companies putting out RISC-V dev boards,
 Sifive, a couple weeks ago with the suggestion of making available a paid
 RISC-V VPS, and one of their field engineers got back to me last week with a
 note that they're looking into it.

 I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary extensions will
 inevitably win out for hardware, just as a similar model has basically won
 already for software, but that doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one to
 do it. Someone else might execute that model better.
I could not agree more - look at Parallella! Their model is the same yet it ultimately failed (unfortunately as I think Exynos is seriously good stuff)! :(
I only ever saw Parallella used in the context of a CPU where you offload computation onto, rather than something your system runs directly on-top of. For this, I assumed their target audience was mainly places that currently use expensive GPUs.
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 I don't think there's a "dedicated team" for any platform that 
 D runs on, so we don't have "first class support" for any 
 platform then.
But ARM (Android/iOS) has always been treated worse than a stepchild by D devs. No interest whatsoever, leave it to the LDC guys...
 D is largely a volunteer effort: if that's not enough, maybe D 
 isn't right for you. This isn't Kotlin or Swift, where one of 
 the largest companies in the world puts full-time devs on the 
 language and gives everything away for free because it suits 
 their agenda.

 In Apple's case, that means Swift doesn't really support 
 Android and definitely doesn't support Android/AArch64, because 
 putting full-time devs on getting Swift working well with 
 Android doesn't suit their agenda of pushing iOS:
Swift locks you in too much.
 Kotlin is becoming more cross-platform now since google is more 
 cross-platform, but then you're depending on google continually 
 funding development on an OSS project, which they've backed out 
 of before:

 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/

 I don't fault google for making those choices, as nobody has a 
 right to their OSS contributions, but it is something to 
 consider when using any platform, and even more so for an OSS 
 project: who is funding this and why? Will their model be 
 sustainable?

 There are no easy answers here: if you want a free-priced, OSS 
 toolchain, you're going to be marching to the beat of someone's 
 drum.
We all understand that. But often you don't get to choose. If the user wants an app for Android/iOS what you're gonna tell him or her? "I'm not marching to the beat of Google's drum."? Also, having no or no smooth support for something doesn't make the D community "rebels".
 As for ongoing maintenance, Android/ARM was done years ago and 
 hasn't taken much in the way of maintenance to keep most of the 
 stdlib/dmd tests passing, so I don't think that's much of an 
 issue.
Just to make sure it all works. The less work the better.
 btw, it was a thread _you_ started that finally spurred me to 
 begin this Android port five years back, though I'd enquired 
 about and had been considering it earlier:

 https://forum.dlang.org/thread/yhulkqvlwnxjklnogmfv forum.dlang.org
Ha ha! I know and you picked up on it. Thank you very much, it's much appreciated. But look at the date: November 2013 (!) and we're still talking about it while others have overtaken D in this respect. 5 years + the founding of the D Language Foundation. Sometimes it's good to think outside the box a little and see what's going on around you. It's not just fancy ranges and allocators. The software has to actually run somewhere.
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 08:34:31 UTC, Chris wrote:
 [...]
Yes, something like that should be done, but I won't be doing much with dub till next year. If anyone else is interested in doing it earlier, feel free. [...]
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote: From one of the articles you linked: "The Apple Swift compiler has had the ability to compile code for the Android platform for a few years now, but it hasn’t made many friends in the developer community owing to its complexity. Our toolchain was designed to solve this problem by taking the complexity and headaches out of the process, so you can focus on building great apps for your users." If Android devs have been reluctant to touch Swift owing to its complexity (not the language, the toolchain), do you think they would touch D?
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 12 September 2018 at 10:09, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 16:50:33 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main branches and
 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out for both linux and Android.
 It does not seem that many are paying attention to this sea change that is
 going on with computing though, so let me lay out some evidence. ...
I mostly agree with you, Joakim. I own a very nice (but now old) ODROID U2 (check the ODROID XU4 or C2!) so ARM support is important for me... Also, check this: https://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G152875062626 HOWEVER, I think Iain is right - PPC64 and RISC-V are becoming more and more popular nowadays and may become more popular than ARM in the future but that future is unclear.
If and when they do, I'm sure D and other languages will be ported to them, but right now they're most definitely not. I know because I actually looked for a RISC-V VPS on which to port ldc and found nothing. Conversely, I was able to rent out an ARM Cubieboard2 remotely four years back when I was first getting ldc going on ARM: https://forum.dlang.org/post/steigfwkywotxsyppvza forum.dlang.org I contacted one of the few companies putting out RISC-V dev boards, Sifive, a couple weeks ago with the suggestion of making available a paid RISC-V VPS, and one of their field engineers got back to me last week with a note that they're looking into it. I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary extensions will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a similar model has basically won already for software, but that doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one to do it. Someone else might execute that model better.
POWER9 has been making some headway, for instance finally they have a sensible real type (IEEE Quadruple). Though the developers working on glibc support seem to be making a shambles of it, where they want to support both new and old long double types at the same time at run-time! It seems that no one thought about Fortran, Ada, or D when it came to long double support in the C runtime library *sigh*. For us, I think we can choose to ignore the old IBM 128-bit float, and so remove any supporting code from our library, focusing instead only on completing IEEE 128-bit float support (LDC, upstream your local patches before i start naming and shaming you). ARM seems to be taking RISC-V seriously at least (this site was taken down after a couple days if I understand right: http://archive.fo/SkiH0). There is currently a lot of investment going into ARM64 in the server space right now, but signals I'm getting from people working on those projects are that it just doesn't hold water. With one comparison being a high end ARM64 server is no better than a cheap laptop bought 5 years ago. RISC-V got accepted into gcc-7, and runtime made it into glibc 2.27, there's certainly a lot effort being pushed for it. They have excellent simulator support on qemu, porting druntime only took two days. Patches for RISCV64 will come soon, probably with some de-duplication of large blocks. Iain.
Sep 12 2018
next sibling parent reply Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:41:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw 
wrote:
 With one comparison being a high end ARM64 server is no better 
 than a cheap laptop bought 5 years ago.
For single thread performance that's true, but it's not how a server works?
 RISC-V got accepted into gcc-7, and runtime made it into glibc 
 2.27, there's certainly a lot effort being pushed for it.  They 
 have excellent simulator support on qemu, porting druntime only 
 took two days.  Patches for RISCV64 will come soon, probably 
 with some de-duplication of large blocks.
Druntime works on riscv?
Sep 13 2018
parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 13 September 2018 at 10:11, Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:41:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 With one comparison being a high end ARM64 server is no better than a
 cheap laptop bought 5 years ago.
For single thread performance that's true, but it's not how a server works?
Wait, how do YOU think a server works?
 RISC-V got accepted into gcc-7, and runtime made it into glibc 2.27,
 there's certainly a lot effort being pushed for it.  They have excellent
 simulator support on qemu, porting druntime only took two days.  Patches for
 RISCV64 will come soon, probably with some de-duplication of large blocks.
Druntime works on riscv?
Yes - on a simulator at least. Haven't tried running all unittests yet, nor shared library support. I did run two of the most convuluted tests I can think of after building - runnable/eh.d and runnable/sdtor.d - both pass with flying colours.
Sep 13 2018
prev sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:41:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw 
wrote:
 On 12 September 2018 at 10:09, Joakim via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary 
 extensions will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a 
 similar model has basically won already for software, but that 
 doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one to do it. Someone 
 else might execute that model better.
POWER9 has been making some headway, for instance finally they have a sensible real type (IEEE Quadruple). Though the developers working on glibc support seem to be making a shambles of it, where they want to support both new and old long double types at the same time at run-time! It seems that no one thought about Fortran, Ada, or D when it came to long double support in the C runtime library *sigh*. For us, I think we can choose to ignore the old IBM 128-bit float, and so remove any supporting code from our library, focusing instead only on completing IEEE 128-bit float support (LDC, upstream your local patches before i start naming and shaming you).
All the pulls linked from that AArch64 tracker issue above were submitted upstream first before merging into the ldc repo. Only one patch that I know of hasn't been merged upstream yet: my commit to add IEEE Quadruple support to core.internal.convert, only because I want to add another Android commit to that pull soon, but the patch is available in the open druntime pulls. If you know of some other patches that need to be upstreamed, let us know, AFAIK they were all upstreamed first.
 ARM seems to be taking RISC-V seriously at least (this site was 
 taken down after a couple days if I understand right: 
 http://archive.fo/SkiH0).  There is currently a lot of 
 investment going into ARM64 in the server space right now, but 
 signals I'm getting from people working on those projects are 
 that it just doesn't hold water.  With one comparison being a 
 high end ARM64 server is no better than a cheap laptop bought 5 
 years ago.
As Kagamin says, it depends on how many cores you're using and what benchmark you run, but most of the time, that's not true at all: https://blog.cloudflare.com/arm-takes-wing/ And ARM does it with much less electric power used, as shown in that last graph, which you have to take into account when looking at the total costs. The ARM blog post I linked earlier in this thread shows they've gone ahead with using ARM too.
 RISC-V got accepted into gcc-7, and runtime made it into glibc 
 2.27, there's certainly a lot effort being pushed for it.  They 
 have excellent simulator support on qemu, porting druntime only 
 took two days.  Patches for RISCV64 will come soon, probably 
 with some de-duplication of large blocks.
Great, but it's still in very nascent stages, with linux only running on it this year. I thought about using Qemu but figured the slowness and possible hardware compatibility issues weren't worth it. I hope some open arch like these takes off sometime soon, as I don't like an ARM monopoly much better than the previous Intel one, but it's going to take awhile for POWER/RISC-V to get anywhere close.
Sep 14 2018
parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:
On 14 September 2018 at 09:51, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:41:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 12 September 2018 at 10:09, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary extensions
 will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a similar model has basically
 won already for software, but that doesn't mean that RISC-V will be the one
 to do it. Someone else might execute that model better.
POWER9 has been making some headway, for instance finally they have a sensible real type (IEEE Quadruple). Though the developers working on glibc support seem to be making a shambles of it, where they want to support both new and old long double types at the same time at run-time! It seems that no one thought about Fortran, Ada, or D when it came to long double support in the C runtime library *sigh*. For us, I think we can choose to ignore the old IBM 128-bit float, and so remove any supporting code from our library, focusing instead only on completing IEEE 128-bit float support (LDC, upstream your local patches before i start naming and shaming you).
All the pulls linked from that AArch64 tracker issue above were submitted upstream first before merging into the ldc repo. Only one patch that I know of hasn't been merged upstream yet: my commit to add IEEE Quadruple support to core.internal.convert, only because I want to add another Android commit to that pull soon, but the patch is available in the open druntime pulls. If you know of some other patches that need to be upstreamed, let us know, AFAIK they were all upstreamed first.
Can you send me links to any open PR you have? These should not be sitting around for months without merge. The 128-bit float support was particularly annoying as I nearly wasted a day implementing it myself without knowing someone already had done the work.
Sep 14 2018
parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 16:53:16 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 14 September 2018 at 09:51, Joakim via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 22:41:31 UTC, Iain Buclaw 
 wrote:
 On 12 September 2018 at 10:09, Joakim via Digitalmars-d 
 <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 I think their model of having an open ISA with proprietary 
 extensions
 will inevitably win out for hardware, just as a similar 
 model has basically
 won already for software, but that doesn't mean that RISC-V 
 will be the one
 to do it. Someone else might execute that model better.
POWER9 has been making some headway, for instance finally they have a sensible real type (IEEE Quadruple). Though the developers working on glibc support seem to be making a shambles of it, where they want to support both new and old long double types at the same time at run-time! It seems that no one thought about Fortran, Ada, or D when it came to long double support in the C runtime library *sigh*. For us, I think we can choose to ignore the old IBM 128-bit float, and so remove any supporting code from our library, focusing instead only on completing IEEE 128-bit float support (LDC, upstream your local patches before i start naming and shaming you).
All the pulls linked from that AArch64 tracker issue above were submitted upstream first before merging into the ldc repo. Only one patch that I know of hasn't been merged upstream yet: my commit to add IEEE Quadruple support to core.internal.convert, only because I want to add another Android commit to that pull soon, but the patch is available in the open druntime pulls. If you know of some other patches that need to be upstreamed, let us know, AFAIK they were all upstreamed first.
Can you send me links to any open PR you have? These should not be sitting around for months without merge.
That's on me: I had another commit in the works for Android that's mostly working, but put it aside for the ldc 1.11 release, updating the docs on the wiki, and now reworking the Android emulated TLS patch for the upcoming LLVM 7 release. Feel free to use the commit I submitted here a couple months ago or to review it, but I'd like to get that second Android commit in before that pull's merged: https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/2257
Sep 14 2018
prev sibling parent Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:23:53 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I agree with a lot of what you say here, but I'm not sure what 
 you mean by "first class support for mobile." What exactly do 
 you believe D needs to reach that level?
Natural-feeling bindings to platform libraries that are not incredibly slow and that are well-maintained. What does it matter that you can run a webserver from your phone if you can't write a "hello world" GUI program, set an alarm, or enqueue a download?
Sep 11 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 [...]
Oh, I reported the AArch64 release of LDC to this blog a month ago, and I just saw that they wrote up an entry about it last week: https://www.worksonarm.com/blog/woa-issue-65/
Sep 10 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply tide <tide tide.tide> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 
 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Sep 10 2018
parent reply "Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)" <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X that 
 per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
Sep 13 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
(Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 
 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young: https://www.searchforce.com/blog/the-comscore-u-s-mobile-app-report-2017/ I went all-mobile three years ago, haven't looked back.
Sep 13 2018
parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
 (Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 
 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young:
Yeah but 90% of the time people spend on mobile is just dicking about. Sending IMs, facebook, point and click games. And thats a huge part of the usage stats, people can now spend more time online wasting time in more situations than ever before. PCs are generally seen a tool to accomplish tasks, for word processing or a high end gaming thing, audio / video editing, mobile is more entertainment. Not many people are doing what you are by using your mobile as a desktop. I'm not saying that makes mobile worthless, what I'm saying is that your hypothesis is like saying TV has taken over from typewriters.
Sep 14 2018
next sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick 
 Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are 
 now 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young:
Yeah but 90% of the time people spend on mobile is just dicking about. Sending IMs, facebook, point and click games. And thats a huge part of the usage stats, people can now spend more time online wasting time in more situations than ever before.
And people don't use PCs for such things? ;) I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop in PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the iPad came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
 PCs are generally seen a tool to accomplish tasks, for word 
 processing or a high end gaming thing, audio / video editing, 
 mobile is more entertainment. Not many people are doing what 
 you are by using your mobile as a desktop.

 I'm not saying that makes mobile worthless, what I'm saying is 
 that your hypothesis is like saying TV has taken over from 
 typewriters.
More like when computers first started replacing typewriters, I'm sure many laughed at that possibility back then too. :) You've probably heard of the possibly apocryphal story of how Blackberry and Nokia engineers disassembled the first iPhone and dismissed it because it only got a day of battery life, while their devices lasted much longer. They thought the mainstream market would care about such battery life as much as their early adopters, but they were wrong. But here's a better story for this occasion, Ken Olsen, the head of DEC who built the minicomputers on which Walter got his start, is supposed to have disassembled the first IBM PC and this was his reaction: "Ken Olsen bought one of the first IBM PCs and disassembled it on a table in Olsen’s office. 'He was amazed at the crappy power supply,' Avram said, 'that it was so puny. Olsen thought that if IBM used such poor engineering then Digital didn’t have anything to worry about.' Clearly Olsen was wrong." https://www.cringely.com/2011/02/09/ken-olsen-and-post-industrial-computing/ You're making the same mistake as him. It _doesn't matter_ what people first use the new tool for, what matters is what it _can_ be used for, particularly over time. That time is now, as top and mid-range smartphone chips now rival mid-to low-end PC CPUs, which is the majority of the market. The x86/x64 PC's days are numbered, just as it once killed off the minicomputer decades ago.
Sep 15 2018
next sibling parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 15:25:55 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick
And people don't use PCs for such things? ;)
Sure, but they use them for a bunch of other stuff too. My point was that mobile growth has been in the "such things" but barely made a dent in the other stuff. So when you see 30% pc screen time and 70% mobile, its not a 70% drop in actual time spent in front of a PC. It's more a massive growth in time on mobile doing mostly banal pointless crap.
 I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop in 
 PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the iPad 
 came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have 
 switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
Yet PC sales are up this year, mobile is down, and tablet sales have fallen for 3 years in a row.
 More like when computers first started replacing typewriters, 
 I'm sure many laughed at that possibility back then too. :)
Im not laughing at the idea of mobile eating into desktop PC share. What Im saying is that it hasnt done so as much as you think. And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years doesnt mean it will continue so inevitably. I actually think most people would prefer a separate desktop and mobile device, whether that desktop is just the size of pack of cigarettes, or a big box with 5 fans in it.
 You've probably heard of the possibly apocryphal story of how 
 Blackberry and Nokia engineers disassembled the first iPhone 
 and dismissed it because it only got a day of battery life, 
 while their devices lasted much longer. They thought the 
 mainstream market would care about such battery life as much as 
 their early adopters, but they were wrong.

 But here's a better story for this occasion, Ken Olsen, the 
 head of DEC who built the minicomputers on which Walter got his 
 start, is supposed to have disassembled the first IBM PC and 
 this was his reaction:

 "Ken Olsen bought one of the first IBM PCs and disassembled it 
 on a table in Olsen’s office.

 'He was amazed at the crappy power supply,' Avram said, 'that 
 it was so puny.  Olsen thought that if IBM used such poor 
 engineering then Digital didn’t have anything to worry about.'

 Clearly Olsen was wrong."
 https://www.cringely.com/2011/02/09/ken-olsen-and-post-industrial-computing/

 You're making the same mistake as him. It _doesn't matter_ what 
 people first use the new tool for, what matters is what it 
 _can_ be used for, particularly over time. That time is now, as 
 top and mid-range smartphone chips now rival mid-to low-end PC 
 CPUs, which is the majority of the market. The x86/x64 PC's 
 days are numbered, just as it once killed off the minicomputer 
 decades ago.
Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just as guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight line though them.
Sep 15 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 01:03:27 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 15:25:55 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick
And people don't use PCs for such things? ;)
Sure, but they use them for a bunch of other stuff too. My point was that mobile growth has been in the "such things" but barely made a dent in the other stuff. So when you see 30% pc screen time and 70% mobile, its not a 70% drop in actual time spent in front of a PC. It's more a massive growth in time on mobile doing mostly banal pointless crap.
Sure, mobile has grown the market for digital entertainment and communication much more than taking away the time spent doing work on a PC, at least so far.
 I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop in 
 PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the iPad 
 came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have 
 switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
Yet PC sales are up this year, mobile is down, and tablet sales have fallen for 3 years in a row.
Eh, these are all mostly mature markets now, so slight quarterly dips or gains don't matter much anymore. What does it matter that PC sales were up 2-3% last quarter when 7 times as many smartphones and mobile devices were sold in that same quarter?
 More like when computers first started replacing typewriters, 
 I'm sure many laughed at that possibility back then too. :)
Im not laughing at the idea of mobile eating into desktop PC share. What Im saying is that it hasnt done so as much as you think.
I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7 years is mostly due to the rise of mobile. Not sure what you mean by "it hasnt done so as much as you think." You may argue that most using PCs aren't using them for entertainment, but this drop suggests that at least 30% of them were and have now moved to mobile.
 And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years doesnt 
 mean it will continue so inevitably.
Sure, but these trends almost never reverse. ;)
 I actually think most people would prefer a separate desktop 
 and mobile device, whether that desktop is just the size of 
 pack of cigarettes, or a big box with 5 fans in it.
Why? Given how price-sensitive the vast majority of the computing-buying public is- that excludes the Apple sheeple who actually seem to get a hard-on from rising iPhone prices, all the better for them to show how much money they've lucked into by brandishing their "gold" iPhone ;) - I don't see most willing to spend twice on two devices, that could be replaced by just one. Until recently, they didn't have a choice, as you couldn't use your mobile device as a desktop, but the just-released devices I linked in the first post in this thread are starting to change that.
 You've probably heard of the possibly apocryphal story of how 
 Blackberry and Nokia engineers disassembled the first iPhone 
 and dismissed it because it only got a day of battery life, 
 while their devices lasted much longer. They thought the 
 mainstream market would care about such battery life as much 
 as their early adopters, but they were wrong.

 But here's a better story for this occasion, Ken Olsen, the 
 head of DEC who built the minicomputers on which Walter got 
 his start, is supposed to have disassembled the first IBM PC 
 and this was his reaction:

 "Ken Olsen bought one of the first IBM PCs and disassembled it 
 on a table in Olsen’s office.

 'He was amazed at the crappy power supply,' Avram said, 'that 
 it was so puny.  Olsen thought that if IBM used such poor 
 engineering then Digital didn’t have anything to worry about.'

 Clearly Olsen was wrong."
 https://www.cringely.com/2011/02/09/ken-olsen-and-post-industrial-computing/

 You're making the same mistake as him. It _doesn't matter_ 
 what people first use the new tool for, what matters is what 
 it _can_ be used for, particularly over time. That time is 
 now, as top and mid-range smartphone chips now rival mid-to 
 low-end PC CPUs, which is the majority of the market. The 
 x86/x64 PC's days are numbered, just as it once killed off the 
 minicomputer decades ago.
Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just as guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight line though them.
Except none of these examples or my own prediction are based on simple extrapolation between data points. Rather, we're analyzing the underlying technical details and capabilities and coming to different conclusions about whether the status quo is likely to remain. So I don't think any of us are "guilty" of your charge.
Sep 15 2018
parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 04:47:11 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 01:03:27 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop 
 in PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the 
 iPad came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have 
 switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
Yet PC sales are up this year, mobile is down, and tablet sales have fallen for 3 years in a row.
Eh, these are all mostly mature markets now, so slight quarterly dips or gains don't matter much anymore. What does it matter that PC sales were up 2-3% last quarter when 7 times as many smartphones and mobile devices were sold in that same quarter?
Some analysts have predicted that PC sales will plateau at some point and if that's where we're at now then 30% drop in shipments is not death of the market.
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7 years is 
 mostly due to the rise of mobile.
I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". (For a lot of people anyway)
 And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years doesnt 
 mean it will continue so inevitably.
Sure, but these trends almost never reverse. ;)
It doesnt need to reverse for "the PC is dead" to be false.
 I actually think most people would prefer a separate desktop 
 and mobile device, whether that desktop is just the size of 
 pack of cigarettes, or a big box with 5 fans in it.
Why? Given how price-sensitive the vast majority of the computing-buying public is- that excludes the Apple sheeple who actually seem to get a hard-on from rising iPhone prices, all the better for them to show how much money they've lucked into by brandishing their "gold" iPhone ;) - I don't see most willing to spend twice on two devices, that could be replaced by just one. Until recently, they didn't have a choice, as you couldn't use your mobile device as a desktop, but the just-released devices I linked in the first post in this thread are starting to change that.
Because for about £300 you can get an intel NUC system with 120GB SSD, which is more powerful and more upgradeable than your £700 mobile device. And some people still want that. And because most people have more than one TV, some have multiple phones, phones and tablets, and desktops, and multiple games consoles. And they still use them all in different situations. This "one device" thing is your preference and you're projecting it onto everyone else.
 Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes 
 predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just as 
 guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight line 
 though them.
Except none of these examples or my own prediction are based on simple extrapolation between data points. Rather, we're analyzing the underlying technical details and capabilities and coming to different conclusions about whether the status quo is likely to remain. So I don't think any of us are "guilty" of your charge.
Of course you are, you're making predictions and assuming the trends will continue, you assume the technical details are all important. Im saying they are only part of it, that people have requirements / preferences outside of how powerful the device is. Lots of people were predicting ebooks would kill the real book market a few years back, turns out people still prefer to have an actual paper book to read, ebooks peaked a few years ago and real books have been in growth ever since. That was people seeing a trend and assuming it would continue just like you are.
Sep 16 2018
next sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 10:25:30 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 04:47:11 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 01:03:27 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop 
 in PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the 
 iPad came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have 
 switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
Yet PC sales are up this year, mobile is down, and tablet sales have fallen for 3 years in a row.
Eh, these are all mostly mature markets now, so slight quarterly dips or gains don't matter much anymore. What does it matter that PC sales were up 2-3% last quarter when 7 times as many smartphones and mobile devices were sold in that same quarter?
Some analysts have predicted that PC sales will plateau at some point and if that's where we're at now then 30% drop in shipments is not death of the market.
I see no reason why they would plateau, looks like wishful thinking to me.
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7 years 
 is mostly due to the rise of mobile.
I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". (For a lot of people anyway)
Sure, that's part of it, but that suggests that once smartphones reach that performance threshold, they will replace PCs altogether. I think we've reached that threshold now.
 And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years doesnt 
 mean it will continue so inevitably.
Sure, but these trends almost never reverse. ;)
It doesnt need to reverse for "the PC is dead" to be false.
Plateaus almost never happen, it's not the natural order of things. For example, newspapers hoped their ad revenue had plateaued from 2000-2005, then they plunged: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Naa_newspaper_ad_revenue.svg I've predicted that a similar plunge is about to happen to PC sales.
 I actually think most people would prefer a separate desktop 
 and mobile device, whether that desktop is just the size of 
 pack of cigarettes, or a big box with 5 fans in it.
Why? Given how price-sensitive the vast majority of the computing-buying public is- that excludes the Apple sheeple who actually seem to get a hard-on from rising iPhone prices, all the better for them to show how much money they've lucked into by brandishing their "gold" iPhone ;) - I don't see most willing to spend twice on two devices, that could be replaced by just one. Until recently, they didn't have a choice, as you couldn't use your mobile device as a desktop, but the just-released devices I linked in the first post in this thread are starting to change that.
Because for about £300 you can get an intel NUC system with 120GB SSD, which is more powerful and more upgradeable than your £700 mobile device. And some people still want that. And because most people have more than one TV, some have multiple phones, phones and tablets, and desktops, and multiple games consoles. And they still use them all in different situations.
That's more on the high end, where people use many devices. On the low- to mid-end of the market, where most of the sales happen, people are happy to buy fewer devices that get the job done.
 This "one device" thing is your preference and you're 
 projecting it onto everyone else.
Looks to me like you're the one projecting here. People used to buy standalone mp3 players, GPS devices, point-and-shoot cameras, handheld gaming consoles, etc., etc. Sales of all those standalone devices have been devastated by the smartphone; here's just one example of what happened to camera sales after the smartphone took over, which I've linked on this forum before: https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/latest-camera-sales-chart-reveals-death-compact-camera/ I find it strange that you think the PC won't also be rolled up by mobile like this.
 Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes 
 predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just 
 as guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight line 
 though them.
Except none of these examples or my own prediction are based on simple extrapolation between data points. Rather, we're analyzing the underlying technical details and capabilities and coming to different conclusions about whether the status quo is likely to remain. So I don't think any of us are "guilty" of your charge.
Of course you are, you're making predictions and assuming the trends will continue, you assume the technical details are all important. Im saying they are only part of it, that people have requirements / preferences outside of how powerful the device is. Lots of people were predicting ebooks would kill the real book market a few years back, turns out people still prefer to have an actual paper book to read, ebooks peaked a few years ago and real books have been in growth ever since. That was people seeing a trend and assuming it would continue just like you are.
No, print is pretty much dead, it's just hard to track because so many ebooks have gone indie now: https://www.geekwire.com/2018/traditional-publishers-ebook-sales-drop-indie-authors-amazon-take-off/ What are these magical "requirements/preferences" that you cannot name, that you believe will keep print alive? That will be really funny. :)
Sep 16 2018
next sibling parent reply tide <tide tide.tide> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7 years 
 is mostly due to the rise of mobile.
I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". (For a lot of people anyway)
Sure, that's part of it, but that suggests that once smartphones reach that performance threshold, they will replace PCs altogether. I think we've reached that threshold now.
I feel only looking at sales stats is irrelevant. I know people that have lost their phone and just bought a new phone. They get stolen a lot more easily. If your screen breaks you are better off buying a new phone as the cost of replacing the screen is going to be almost as much as a new one. Someone I know had to fight his boss to repair his phone cause he didn't want a brand new iPhone, he still has an Android device and they switched to Apple a while back. Note, it still costed more to buy the new phone than repair his old one. Computers last much longer, I've had the one I have right now for 8 years. It runs everything I need it to. Faster than a smartphone or tablet, or even most newer laptops still. There's no reason to buy a new one, not that I would buy a prebuilt one anyways. Which I'm pretty sure are what those sales represent. Can't really count a CPU sale as a "PC" sale as it might just be someone upgrading from their old PC.
Sep 16 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:41:41 UTC, tide wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7 years 
 is mostly due to the rise of mobile.
I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". (For a lot of people anyway)
Sure, that's part of it, but that suggests that once smartphones reach that performance threshold, they will replace PCs altogether. I think we've reached that threshold now.
I feel only looking at sales stats is irrelevant. I know people that have lost their phone and just bought a new phone. They get stolen a lot more easily. If your screen breaks you are better off buying a new phone as the cost of replacing the screen is going to be almost as much as a new one. Someone I know had to fight his boss to repair his phone cause he didn't want a brand new iPhone, he still has an Android device and they switched to Apple a while back. Note, it still costed more to buy the new phone than repair his old one. Computers last much longer, I've had the one I have right now for 8 years. It runs everything I need it to. Faster than a smartphone or tablet, or even most newer laptops still. There's no reason to buy a new one, not that I would buy a prebuilt one anyways. Which I'm pretty sure are what those sales represent. Can't really count a CPU sale as a "PC" sale as it might just be someone upgrading from their old PC.
DIY PC sales are estimated at around 50 million a year, they don't move the needle compared to mobile sales. And yes, smartphones get broken easier and need to be upgraded more often, _just as the PC was once a shoddier product than a DEC minicomputer_, as Ken Olsen noted. What _matters_ is that mobile is approaching 10X the sales of PCs. That pays for a lot of innovation and upgrades that the PC base simply cannot pay for: they just don't have the numbers. That is the _same_ way the PC swamped the minicomputer, and mobile is now doing it to the PC. On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:49:33 UTC, tide wrote:
 That is, it is not just the performance that affects the sales 
 of phones. There's a lot of factors that lead to there being 
 new phones sales. Know someone that's gone through 3 phones in 
 comparison to just the one I have. Treadmills eat phones for 
 breakfast.
You're conflating my two arguments. Performance has nothing to do with why mobile sells a lot more already, that's all about battery life, mobility, 4G networks, etc. Performance is why mobile's about to kill off the PC too, because it's finally performant enough. On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 22:03:12 UTC, Gambler wrote:
 You're right about APKs. Not sure whether it changed since I 
 looked into it, or I didn't read the docs correctly in the 
 first place. The overall dev/distribution process, though, 
 still looks... uh, involved compared to compiling and running 
 an executable on PC.
I suspect the 10-15 command-line steps listed there to build a GUI app on Android itself are _much less_ work than on any other platform, especially since you don't have to install any big SDK like VS, Xcode, or Qt where plenty of things can go wrong. Of course, it can always be made simpler.
 In general, I am still convinced of the overall negative effect 
 of mobile devices on computing. They are designed to be used 
 mostly for consumption and social sharing. They have a lot of 
 limitations that currently drag the whole IT ecosystem down.
I think you want to cling to that opinion regardless of the evidence.
 Some excellent high-level criticisms:

 https://www.fastcompany.com/40435064/what-alan-kay-thinks-about-the-iphone-and-technology-now
An interesting interview, thanks for the link. Mostly not about mobile, but he seems to think the iPhone was too limiting and should have come with a stylus? Neither critique applies to Android, which is the vast majority of the mobile market, where Termux and the stylus of the Galaxy Note are available, if you want them.
 http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/
He mostly states the obvious, of course touch is not the future of HCI interfaces. He mentions speech as a posibility in the addendum linked at the end, there are people working on it now (I can't believe it's been two years since this article was written): https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/11/google-home-review-a-step-forward-for-hotwords-a-step-backward-in-capability/ That excellent overview notes a problem with discoverability of voice commands in Google Home, so they'll have to come up with a kind of "manpage" for that. ;) As for his preferred haptic approach, it's only really suited for certain kinds of spatial manipulation, which is actually a narrow minority of how people use computers, and the tech for that just isn't there yet. I too could make up some fantastical interface, like direct brain reading, but it's meaningless if the underlying tech hasn't been invented yet.
 Specific Example #1:
 Web design had been devastated by touchscreens.
Not sure why that matters if you agree with Kay that HTML is an abortion? :) I actually think it's great that mobile is killing off the web, as the Comscore usage stats I linked earlier show.
 Instead of figuring out
 how to create more powerful interfaces designers spend their 
 mental
 capacity on how to cram information onto tiny screens of unknown
 orientation. The vocabulary of reliably available user 
 interactions has
 shrunk to actions people can do with a single thumb. Worst of 
 all, this
 is spreading to desktop apps. I've seen in this in my 
 day-to-day job.
Broadening your complaint out to non-web GUIs, it is true that people overuse mobile screens now, rather than using the right screen for the job, ie mobile is best about 80% of the time, so you shouldn't use it 90% of the time. The devices and software I linked in my first post are changing that, by bringing multi-window GUIs to mobile devices.
 Specific Example #2:
 People brought up on mobile devices do not know how to type on 
 a keyboard:
 http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201803290068.html
 This is not limited to Japan. Again, I've seen this in real 
 life.
I don't know people of any generation who didn't have to spend some of their adolescent or adult years learning how to use a keyboard, ie it's never been something you're born with or pick up in grade school. Honestly, we're in a weird time right now where voice is good enough for basic tasks, but keyboards are still needed for programming and other complex tasks. When voice gets good enough in the coming years, we will simply ditch the keyboards and stop forcing the kids to learn such outdated tools.
 Do you think that someone who can't type on a keyboard will be
 able to use _Unix terminal emulation_ to create software? 
 Termux is a
 cool project, but it doesn't target "billions of people". It 
 targets a
 handful of experienced Linux users who want to fiddle with 
 Android.
I see, so an iPhone is way too simple, but a terminal is way too complex? Is there any consistency to your complaints? Nobody said Termux "targets" billions, only that it gave them access. 99.99% of the people running PCs never bothered to write a single line of code on them either. Termux gives a _lot_ more people that same access, it's up to them if they decide to use it. Of course, it can always be made even simpler and easier, but this is likely the best you're going to get for free.
 And yes, we do need computing power for new things. I agree 
 with that article on machine learning hype. But that doesn't 
 change the fact that without all the video cards modern machine 
 learning architectures would be impractical, whether or not you 
 consider them particularly useful or good.
I don't see why the hardware matters at all if the software use it's put to is not useful or good.
 Computing power was the enabler.
Yes, that was my initial point of this thread: the computing power in your hand these days is much more powerful than the PC ever was, because it's in billions' more hands and the mobile chips are now just as fast. On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 23:56:23 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 10:25:30 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:

 Some analysts have predicted that PC sales will plateau at 
 some point and if that's where we're at now then 30% drop in 
 shipments is not death of the market.
I see no reason why they would plateau, looks like wishful thinking to me.
Might be, but so is trying to convince everyone your predictions are correct so they will focus their work on the issues important to you.
Not at all, because if my predictions are correct, this language will disappear along with the PC platform it's built on. And I've never suggested anybody work on anything "important to [me]," my original post even stated that D may never do well on mobile. In other words, this thread isn't about me or my work: it's a warning about D surviving the coming PC collapse. I've opened an escape hatch with the Android port, but it's up to D devs to take it.
 I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for 
 most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of 
 mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster 
 machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster 
 computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". 
 (For a lot of people anyway)
Sure, that's part of it, but that suggests that once smartphones reach that performance threshold, they will replace PCs altogether. I think we've reached that threshold now.
If it was just about performance, but it's not.
Of course, it's not just about performance but once that threshold is crossed, you can start doing everything else, like adding the multi-window interfaces that the mobile devices I linked initially have.
 And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years 
 doesnt mean it will continue so inevitably.
Sure, but these trends almost never reverse. ;)
It doesnt need to reverse for "the PC is dead" to be false.
Plateaus almost never happen, it's not the natural order of things.
OK the market stabilises.
I don't see how you changing the word you used changes anything about the underlying phenomenon: that doesn't happen.
 Because for about £300 you can get an intel NUC system with 
 120GB SSD, which is more powerful and more upgradeable than 
 your £700 mobile device. And some people still want that. And 
 because most people have more than one TV, some have multiple 
 phones, phones and tablets, and desktops, and multiple games 
 consoles. And they still use them all in different situations.
That's more on the high end, where people use many devices. On the low- to mid-end of the market, where most of the sales happen, people are happy to buy fewer devices that get the job done.
Most households have more devices than ever before, and hardware is only getting cheaper. The idea that people will have to choose just one device is plainly wrong.
You need to get out in the world a bit more. The majority of smartphones these days are bought in emerging markets where _nobody in their home has ever owned a PC or used the internet_. I've talked to these working stiffs in developing markets, you clearly haven't. They're not about to spend $200-400 on a PC when they could barely afford the one $100-200 smartphone in their home now. But they might buy a $50-100 laptop shell like the one in the youtube video I linked in my initial post, attach it to their Android smartphone, and get some kind of basic work or learning done with a traditional multi-window interface, which has been built into all Android devices since 7.0.
 I find it strange that you think the PC won't also be rolled 
 up by mobile like this.
Can you put a 3GB hard drive in your phone?
Why would I ever want to do this when I noted my phone has 128 GBs of space? ;) If you mean 3 _TB_, yes, I simply attach my slim 1 TB external drive and back up whatever I want over USB 3.0.
 Or a high end graphics card?
Smartphones come with very powerful graphics cards these days, plenty powerful enough to drive lots of graphic loads.
Or a soundcard with balanced outputs?
Some phones come with high-end DACs and the like, or you could always attach something externally if you really needed to. There are even high-end, movie-level camera systems being built around smartphones now: https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/8/1/17639752/red-holographic-hydrogen-one-phone-fcc-approval
 Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes 
 predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just 
 as guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight 
 line though them.
Except none of these examples or my own prediction are based on simple extrapolation between data points. Rather, we're analyzing the underlying technical details and capabilities and coming to different conclusions about whether the status quo is likely to remain. So I don't think any of us are "guilty" of your charge.
Of course you are, you're making predictions and assuming the trends will continue, you assume the technical details are all important. Im saying they are only part of it, that people have requirements / preferences outside of how powerful the device is. Lots of people were predicting ebooks would kill the real book market a few years back, turns out people still prefer to have an actual paper book to read, ebooks peaked a few years ago and real books have been in growth ever since. That was people seeing a trend and assuming it would continue just like you are.
No, print is pretty much dead, it's just hard to track because so many ebooks have gone indie now: https://www.geekwire.com/2018/traditional-publishers-ebook-sales-drop-indie-authors-amazon-take-off/ What are these magical "requirements/preferences" that you cannot name, that you believe will keep print alive? That will be really funny. :)
You obviously didn't research thoroughly enough, the site that was the source for the geekwire article shows quite clearly that print books still outsell ebooks almost twice over. http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide29.jpg
And how does that contradict anything I said? _You_ said that ebooks have peaked while print keeps growing, whereas the article I linked and this guy's data show ebooks growing and print continuing to decline. I never said ebook sales had passed print yet, only linked to that article saying that it's hard to measure now but it's likely print is still declining, and that print is effectively dead, as it's only going to keep declining into irrelevance.
 and yes that's with indie published books included.

 Another interesting thing from that report was the average 
 price of indie ebooks was $2.95

 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide26.jpg

 So even selling ebooks for peanuts cant catch them up.
They aren't selling them for "peanuts," they've simply stripped out a bunch of legacy costs like paper, editors, publishers, and the like. The reason authors still prefer indie ebooks is they get more money per book even at that lower price, as the rest of the supply chain and distribution had squeezed them down to only 5-15% of the much higher print price. Anyway, ebooks are a dumb format, it's the LaserDisc of publishing. What killed VHS was the DVD, ie it will be blogs and other more interactive content that kills off print, not simply slapping the same outdated, static format online as an "ebook." On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 06:23:27 UTC, Gambler wrote:
 On 9/15/2018 11:25 AM, Joakim wrote:
 On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick 
 Sabalausky
 (Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are 
 now 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young:
Yeah but 90% of the time people spend on mobile is just dicking about. Sending IMs, facebook, point and click games. And thats a huge part of the usage stats, people can now spend more time online wasting time in more situations than ever before.
And people don't use PCs for such things? ;) I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop in PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the iPad came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
 PCs are generally seen a tool to accomplish tasks, for word 
 processing or a high end gaming thing, audio / video editing, 
 mobile is more entertainment. Not many people are doing what 
 you are by using your mobile as a desktop.

 I'm not saying that makes mobile worthless, what I'm saying 
 is that your hypothesis is like saying TV has taken over from 
 typewriters.
More like when computers first started replacing typewriters, I'm sure many laughed at that possibility back then too. :)
Sure. Xerox production department sabotaged the initial release of Alto, because they were invested in "smart" typewriters. But I don't think this is a valid analogy.
It's more valid than yours, considering it was the typewriter makers who got scared. ;)
 Here is mine. PCs are like books, while tablets and phones are 
 like TV. TV is a more modern medium, but it's highly 
 centralized and strips the audience of control. A successful TV 
 program usually reaches more people than a book, but television 
 has much higher barrier of entry for creators. Moreover, while 
 it is theoretically possible to learn something by watching TV, 
 in practice it's oriented towards "news" and entertainment and 
 _this matters_.

 So should we celebrate dwindling books sales and multi-million 
 ratings of some morning show simply because the show makes a 
 lot of money? Should we encourage underdeveloped countries 
 "skip" books and move "directly" to TV?
This is quite a dumb argument, because mobile has a lot more similar with PCs than it does with TV. There are some superficial similarities, such as centralized app stores and how many people watch stupid youtube videos, but tons of people were whiling away their time surfing the web on a PC long before mobile ever came along. You do realize that microcomputers like the Macintosh and the PC were once the underpowered toys, the "TV" in your silly analogy? Here's an interesting comment from below the Ken Olsen post I linked earlier: "I worked at DEC in an engineering group during the mid-1980s. Someone brought in an early Macintosh and I recall talking to a colleague who was fiddling with MacPaint at the time. I asked what language compilers it had and was told there were none. I asked about database packages and got a similar answer. At that point I dismissed it as an expensive toy, not a “serious” computer. After all, I was working with minis and mainframes that cost thousands, if not millions of dollars, and that were used by dozens and even hundreds of people. In those days DEC was the second largest computer company in the world, and our sights were set on IBM, still ten times our size. It was hard to see these little eight- and sixteen-bit machines as any kind of serious threat. Of course with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight it’s easy to see their inevitable domination of the computing industry as they grew cheaper and more powerful." Guess who else is making laughable complaints about compilers not being available on the first iPhone today? You guys are ignorant of some fairly recent history here, this has all happened before and history is just repeating itself, with mobile supplanting the PC this time around.
Sep 17 2018
next sibling parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Not sure why that matters if you agree with Kay that HTML is an 
 abortion? :) I actually think it's great that mobile is killing 
 off the web, as the Comscore usage stats I linked earlier show.
HTML is a somewhat open standard. I'm more happy with HTML and Javascript, as ugly as they are and as dominated by Google and Microsoft as they are, than having to target private companies' frameworks.
Sep 17 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 22:27:41 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Not sure why that matters if you agree with Kay that HTML is 
 an abortion? :) I actually think it's great that mobile is 
 killing off the web, as the Comscore usage stats I linked 
 earlier show.
HTML is a somewhat open standard. I'm more happy with HTML and Javascript, as ugly as they are and as dominated by Google and Microsoft as they are, than having to target private companies' frameworks.
So you'd rather target an incredibly badly designed open standard than a mostly open source "private company's" framework that's certainly not great, but much better? It's no contest for me, give me the latter any day. And then of course, there's always cross-platform OSS toolkits like Flutter or DlangUI. On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 23:42:03 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:41:41 UTC, tide wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7
Might be, but so is trying to convince everyone your predictions are correct so they will focus their work on the issues important to you.
Not at all, because if my predictions are correct, this language will disappear along with the PC platform it's built on. And I've never suggested anybody work on anything "important to [me]," my original post even stated that D may never do well on mobile.
You are making your arguments to fit your desires.
I can't make head nor tails of this claim, you have a talent for vague non sequiturs. My arguments are based on data, the overwhelming sales numbers I linked. I have no idea what desires you think are involved, I suspect you don't either. :)
 Plateaus almost never happen, it's not the natural order of 
 things.
OK the market stabilises.
I don't see how you changing the word you used changes anything about the underlying phenomenon: that doesn't happen.
You're seriously suggesting that markets never stabilise, say oil prices stay steady for a few years or some such?
Prices flit all over the place, that's not what we're talking about. Oil _production_ has been remarkably consistent and growing for many, many decades: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crude_NGPL_IEAtotal_1960-2008.svg The only hiccup was in the early '80s because of extraordinary measures taken by governments, like price controls and cartel orders, which was still only a 15% drop. If oil production ever drops 30% because some workable substitute comes along, as has happened to PCs now, yes, there is no chance of stabilization. It will be a steady decline from there, as these trends have a kind of momentum.
 Most households have more devices than ever before, and 
 hardware is only getting cheaper. The idea that people will 
 have to choose just one device is plainly wrong.
You need to get out in the world a bit more. The majority of smartphones these days are bought in emerging markets where _nobody in their home has ever owned a PC or used the internet_. I've talked to these working stiffs in developing markets, you clearly haven't.
And what happens when the emerging markets mature? Do they still just cling on to one smart phone in the house? Or are they yearning for more technology?
They buy more mobile devices, the PC will be long since dead and gone.
 I find it strange that you think the PC won't also be rolled 
 up by mobile like this.
Can you put a 3GB hard drive in your phone?
Why would I ever want to do this when I noted my phone has 128 GBs of space? ;) If you mean 3 _TB_, yes, I simply attach my slim 1 TB external drive and back up whatever I want over USB 3.0.
So you're not averse to having some external hardware sat on your desk. Hmmm.
My original post links to examples of using your smartphone connected to a keyboard and monitor or a laptop shell, so I'm not sure where you ever got the idea I was against "external hardware."
 Or a high end graphics card?
Smartphones come with very powerful graphics cards these days, plenty powerful enough to drive lots of graphic loads.
Not if you're into high end gaming.
The vast majority of PCs don't have cards capable of that either. For the few who want it, there will be specialized solutions, whether consoles or whatever.
Or a soundcard with balanced outputs?
Some phones come with high-end DACs and the like, or you could always attach something externally if you really needed to.
There's no such thing as professional audio breakout box for android AFAIK. Up until a few years ago the problem was Android couldn't do low latency audio, I'm not sure if the situation has changed.
If and when that becomes a market that actually matters, somebody will cater to it, just as google optimized the Android video stack for VR a couple years ago: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/08/android-7-0-nougat-review-do-more-on-your-gigantic-smartphone/11/#h2
 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide29.jpg
And how does that contradict anything I said?
It contradicts your statement... "print is pretty much dead" If you can make the argument that print is dead and ebooks booming when print still outsells ebooks in unit sales 2 to 1, and even more than that if you look at revenue then you need to see a shrink. :)
Or I actually understand market dynamics, :) which it's now become clear that you don't. This print decline is never going to stop.
 ebooks have peaked while print keeps growing, whereas the 
 article I linked and this guy's data show ebooks growing and 
 print continuing to decline.
You didnt read the article carefully enough. The growth is in "adult fiction", the market as a whole has fallen.
It's funny how you keep making mistakes and then act as though I made them. The article notes that the indie ebook market has likely "taken off," more than making up for the slight drop in ebook sales from publishers. Adult fiction is examined because it's a particularly relevant market. Since you like that Author Earnings site so much and link to more graphs from his report, you should've taken a moment to read what he actually writes. He notes in his latest report: "a huge chunk of those print dollars are actually going to textbooks and other academic/professional print titles (strangely, the DSM-5 Psychiatric Manual of Mental Disorders was a particularly high 2017 seller). Textbooks, which are generally priced in the $60-$200 range, skew the dollar total significantly toward print. As do children’s books (including Board Books), another huge category of book sales where almost all purchases are in print. When we leave out textbooks and children’s titles, and look only at adult fiction & trade nonfiction, the picture changes somewhat..." http://authorearnings.com/report/january-2018-report-us-online-book-sales-q2-q4-2017/ So the reason to look at the 4 to 1 ratio of ebook sales to print of adult fiction online is because it's a bellwether, as one of the largest market segments that's actually driven by consumers. Textbooks and giant medical manuals are the last to switch to any new tech, as they're selected or purchased by large, hidebound institutions that always adopt new tech last or are more about signaling, ie students and doctors showing off that "I be learning" or "I can look up stuff" with those fat print books that they almost never crack open. Children's print books sell because many parents are wary of exposing their kids to too much screen time. But since adult readers are showing so overwhelmingly that they don't care for print, even those last educational/medical holdouts will soon switch en masse and the print collapse begins.
 I never said ebook sales had passed print yet, only linked to 
 that article saying that it's hard to measure now but it's 
 likely print is still declining, and that print is effectively 
 dead, as it's only going to keep declining into irrelevance.
So it's hard to measure but it's definitely going to die. LOL.
I don't know what you find contradictory about that. A dying market doesn't want to signal that it's going away: that's why the newspaper ad revenue chart I linked before ends in 2014. Their newspaper trade group stopped publishing the data then, clearly because the ongoing collapse only made them look more and more irrelevant. Similarly, we're not getting all the data now because it doesn't suit Amazon's or indie authors' interests to tip their hands. When they've finally killed off print, they'll start trumpeting their numbers and how they did it.
 and yes that's with indie published books included.

 Another interesting thing from that report was the average 
 price of indie ebooks was $2.95

 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide26.jpg

 So even selling ebooks for peanuts cant catch them up.
They aren't selling them for "peanuts," they've simply stripped out a bunch of legacy costs like paper, editors, publishers, and the like. The reason authors still prefer indie ebooks is they get more money per book even at that lower price, as the rest of the supply chain and distribution had squeezed them down to only 5-15% of the much higher print price.
How much profit the author makes is irrelevant. The point is you can buy an ebook for an average of $2.95 or a print book for (uninformed guess) $8. And yet more people still choose the print book.
Ah, now we get to the crux of the matter: you don't know much economics. The fact that the indie ebook author makes a lot more profit is one of the most important factors in this market, and is one of the main reasons why the indie ebook market is currently booming. As for prices bearing on buyers, you should actually _look_ at your data linked above. It notes that prices of indie and Amazon print books are 2-3X those of ebooks, which is why the ebooks sell 10-60X as many units! You try to extrapolate that same price ratio to publishers' ebooks, but the article I linked explicitly noted that publishers will often stupidly charge more for their ebooks than the print version, and your whole argument was invalidated by the note above about textbook/manual prices skewing print prices upwards.
 And this is what even now you dont understand. People like real 
 books, they like the feel of it the immediacy, the intimacy. 
 They like their kindles too.
Heh, the go-to last-resort argument of fans of a dying tech: people just love "the look" of VHS more!
 It's not one or the other. I cant believe you dont understand 
 that.
Yes, yes, we all know how many people are still rocking VHS tapes, iPods, point-and-shoot cameras, etc., all the tech I've pointed out has basically died off. Print is as dead as VHS, not in sales yet, but in terms of having a future. Everybody knows this, even you. Anyway, I'll stop lecturing you on basic economics and business, and bow out from responding to these often silly arguments from you from here on.
Sep 18 2018
next sibling parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 at 07:53:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 22:27:41 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
 wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Not sure why that matters if you agree with Kay that HTML is 
 an abortion? :) I actually think it's great that mobile is 
 killing off the web, as the Comscore usage stats I linked 
 earlier show.
HTML is a somewhat open standard. I'm more happy with HTML and Javascript, as ugly as they are and as dominated by Google and Microsoft as they are, than having to target private companies' frameworks.
So you'd rather target an incredibly badly designed open standard than a mostly open source "private company's" framework that's certainly not great, but much better? It's no contest for me, give me the latter any day. And then of course, there's always cross-platform OSS toolkits like Flutter or DlangUI.
Thinking about it a bit more, the openness of the platform is more important. Android and iOS are effectively closed platforms. You *can* sideload apps, but it's rare to find someone willing to do so. If you're not on the app stores, your app isn't going to get a thousandth as much traction. Windows, on the other hand, has long been an open platform; you can develop for it and publish your programs and Microsoft won't get in the way. So an open source cross-platform toolkit controlled by a single entity isn't bad. I use GTK+ a lot, for instance. But the web and HTML is a better situation than Android and iOS and their toolkits.
Sep 18 2018
parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 at 18:06:37 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
wrote:
 On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 at 07:53:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 22:27:41 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
 wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Not sure why that matters if you agree with Kay that HTML is 
 an abortion? :) I actually think it's great that mobile is 
 killing off the web, as the Comscore usage stats I linked 
 earlier show.
HTML is a somewhat open standard. I'm more happy with HTML and Javascript, as ugly as they are and as dominated by Google and Microsoft as they are, than having to target private companies' frameworks.
So you'd rather target an incredibly badly designed open standard than a mostly open source "private company's" framework that's certainly not great, but much better? It's no contest for me, give me the latter any day. And then of course, there's always cross-platform OSS toolkits like Flutter or DlangUI.
Thinking about it a bit more, the openness of the platform is more important. Android and iOS are effectively closed platforms. You *can* sideload apps, but it's rare to find someone willing to do so. If you're not on the app stores, your app isn't going to get a thousandth as much traction.
I'll note that you wrote "app stores," and for Android there are actually multiple. There's the official Play store from google, the Amazon appstore, app stores for OSS apps like F-Droid or Fossdroid, and over 400 app stores in China, where those first two app stores are almost never used: https://www.appinchina.co/market/app-stores/ Anyone can install any app store on their Android device and get any apps they want, though as you note, most outside China just go with the pre-installed Play or Amazon store.
 Windows, on the other hand, has long been an open platform; you 
 can develop for it and publish your programs and Microsoft 
 won't get in the way.
Though that is now changing with their new UWP platform, which by default must be installed from their own app store, the Microsoft Store. The link for the Windows/AArch64 device in my original post notes that they expect most Windows/AArch64 apps to be UWP apps, and so you'd get them from an app store just like Android most of the time. I read that they do have similar allowances for side-loading UWP apps as Android though, and of course older win32/64 apps on normal Wintel devices isn't affected by this.
 So an open source cross-platform toolkit controlled by a single 
 entity isn't bad. I use GTK+ a lot, for instance. But the web 
 and HTML is a better situation than Android and iOS and their 
 toolkits.
I don't think the app stores are that big a deal as long as side-loading and multiple app stores are always allowed. Of course, that's not the case on iOS, one of the many reasons I've never really used an iOS device.
Sep 18 2018
prev sibling parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 at 07:53:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 22:27:41 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
 wrote:
 You are making your arguments to fit your desires.
I can't make head nor tails of this claim, you have a talent for vague non sequiturs. My arguments are based on data, the overwhelming sales numbers I linked. I have no idea what desires you think are involved, I suspect you don't either. :)
Data and statistics are open to interpretation and you consistently interpret them to fit your desired direction.
 If oil production ever drops 30% because some workable 
 substitute comes along, as has happened to PCs now, yes, there 
 is no chance of stabilization. It will be a steady decline from 
 there, as these trends have a kind of momentum.
Only if the new product meets all the use cases of the old product. Again this is what you dont understand.
 So you're not averse to having some external hardware sat on 
 your desk. Hmmm.
My original post links to examples of using your smartphone connected to a keyboard and monitor or a laptop shell, so I'm not sure where you ever got the idea I was against "external hardware."
If you're gonna have all that on your desk it's no stretch to think well i'll have computer on there too. Oh shit yeah I forgot we're only allowed one computer.
 Not if you're into high end gaming.
The vast majority of PCs don't have cards capable of that either. For the few who want it, there will be specialized solutions, whether consoles or whatever.
It's one of the many use cases that mobile doesnt meet. It's one of the areas where PC sales has been growing year on year. But of course that doesnt fit your wishful thinking scenario. Obviously people will ditch PCs for consoles, oh wait they said that 15 years ago, and now they are saying the opposite.
 There's no such thing as professional audio breakout box for 
 android AFAIK. Up until a few years ago the problem was 
 Android couldn't do low latency audio, I'm not sure if the 
 situation has changed.
If and when that becomes a market that actually matters, somebody will cater to it, just as google optimized the Android video stack for VR a couple years ago:
It's not about it being a market that matters, it's a fact that the kind of processing power and hardware you need for digital audio workstation isnt met by mobile devices and likely never will be because it's like 3d rendering. People doing this stuff always want more cpu cycles, and more bandwidth and storage. It's not like browsing the web where it gets to a point where it's good enough, it's never good enough.
 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide29.jpg
And how does that contradict anything I said?
It contradicts your statement... "print is pretty much dead" If you can make the argument that print is dead and ebooks booming when print still outsells ebooks in unit sales 2 to 1, and even more than that if you look at revenue then you need to see a shrink. :)
Or I actually understand market dynamics, :) which it's now become clear that you don't. This print decline is never going to stop.
And yet sales of print books have been up for each of the last three years. And you call that decline.
 ebooks have peaked while print keeps growing, whereas the 
 article I linked and this guy's data show ebooks growing and 
 print continuing to decline.
You didnt read the article carefully enough. The growth is in "adult fiction", the market as a whole has fallen.
It's funny how you keep making mistakes and then act as though I made them. The article notes that the indie ebook market has likely "taken off," more than making up for the slight drop in ebook sales from publishers.
LOL, if i tried to say "PC sales are likely levelling out" you'd be all over it, oh wait you were. Hypocritical much.
 So the reason to look at the 4 to 1 ratio of ebook sales to 
 print of adult fiction online is because it's a bellwether, as 
 one of the largest market segments that's actually driven by 
 consumers.
You're cherry picking the one bit of data that fits your narrative and then making up some BS about it being a bellwether for the whole market. Tell you what you find me one reputable source that backs up your BS about adult fiction being a bellwether.
 It's not one or the other. I cant believe you dont understand 
 that.
Yes, yes, we all know how many people are still rocking VHS tapes, iPods, point-and-shoot cameras, etc., all the tech I've pointed out has basically died off.
Because DVDs (and now streaming) did everything VHS did and more. Because phones can do everything an IPOD does and more. Because phones do everything P&S cameras did and more. Phones do not do everything a desktop PC can do, far from it. Phones cant do everything a DSLR can do, and likely wont. etc.. 15 years ago, around the time of the original xbox, people were saying the PC gaming market was doomed, and yet its doing better than ever. Why? Because it offers something you dont get with console gaming. Again something you're blind to.
 Print is as dead as VHS, not in sales yet, but in terms of 
 having a future. Everybody knows this, even you.
Except that it's not and you know it.
 Anyway, I'll stop lecturing you on basic economics and 
 business, and bow out from responding to these often silly 
 arguments from you from here on.
So you finally got tired of repeatedly having your ass handed to you on a plate. :)
Sep 19 2018
parent reply Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 19 September 2018 at 18:14:47 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 Only if the new product meets all the use cases of the old 
 product. Again this is what you dont understand.
Why did the iPhone, and after that the smartphone industry as a whole, completely crush the classic cell phones when they have such a poor battery life? Smartphones don't have everything previous phones had. The pros simply outweighed the cons. You don't need a new product to do everything the previous product did for it to be successful enough to replace it. I used to be all about being able to replace a phone's battery manually. With basically any newer smartphone now, you can't anymore. Just because phones aren't doing everything PC's are doing doesn't mean they can't overtake their market. All they need is to have sufficient advantages over them, and even if you don't think this is the case right now, the average user could very well disagree. Just like with removable batteries (which wasn't even a really technical thing).
Sep 19 2018
next sibling parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 05:45:52 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
 On Wednesday, 19 September 2018 at 18:14:47 UTC, Dave Jones 
 wrote:
 Only if the new product meets all the use cases of the old 
 product. Again this is what you dont understand.
Why did the iPhone, and after that the smartphone industry as a whole, completely crush the classic cell phones when they have such a poor battery life? Smartphones don't have everything previous phones had. The pros simply outweighed the cons.
Longer battery life is a convenience not a requirement.
 You don't need a new product to do everything the previous 
 product did for it to be successful enough to replace it.
 I used to be all about being able to replace a phone's battery 
 manually. With basically any newer smartphone now, you can't 
 anymore.
You can still buy the old brick phones with longer battery life. Smartphones have taken over but they havent killed that market completely.
 Just because phones aren't doing everything PC's are doing 
 doesn't mean they can't overtake their market. All they need is 
 to have sufficient advantages over them, and even if you don't 
 think this is the case right now, the average user could very 
 well disagree.
 Just like with removable batteries (which wasn't even a really 
 technical thing).
It's not about phones overtaking desktops in the market, that's long past, it's about phones killing the desktop market completely. All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesnt do something you **require** it to do. If I'm doing pro audio Android is useless, no hardware, not enough processing power, no DAW apps. Doesn't matter if it has an amazing screen, 3 sims, year long battery, etc etc..
Sep 20 2018
next sibling parent reply Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 08:15:39 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 Longer battery life is a convenience not a requirement.
What is a convenience and a requirement is completely subjective. I'd classify the removable battery example as a requirement more than a convenience, but other people don't.
 You can still buy the old brick phones with longer battery 
 life. Smartphones have taken over but they havent killed that 
 market completely.
Just like you can buy pretty much any old thing, obviously markets don't get 100% killed, nobody here is talking about complete, absolute annihilation of the PC to the point that is doesn't exist anymore...
 It's not about phones overtaking desktops in the market, that's 
 long past, it's about phones killing the desktop market 
 completely.
You're just playing on words here.
 All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesnt do 
 something you **require** it to do. If I'm doing pro audio 
 Android is useless, no hardware, not enough processing power, 
 no DAW apps. Doesn't matter if it has an amazing screen, 3 
 sims, year long battery, etc etc..
Correction: "All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesn't do something MOST PEOPLE **require** it to do". I personally wanted phones to always have a removable battery, but I'm not representative of the whole population. You're doing pro audio. Do most people in the world do pro audio ? I think not. "no hardware": if it exists in this plane of the universe, so it must have hardware in some way, don't you think ? "not enough processing power": IIRC the very beginning of this train-wreck of a thread was the fact that processing power on smartphones is constantly increasing... So that's probably just a matter of time. There will always be a niche, almost negligible market for anything. There are still people using vinyl records after all. If that's the point you're trying to make, then yes, it's quite sure that the PC market will *technically* go on forever, there's no arguing about that. I just don't think this is the kind of market this thread was all about.
Sep 20 2018
parent Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 09:32:01 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
 On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 08:15:39 UTC, Dave Jones 
 wrote:
 Longer battery life is a convenience not a requirement.
What is a convenience and a requirement is completely subjective. I'd classify the removable battery example as a requirement more than a convenience, but other people don't.
Unless lack of the feature in question stops you from doing something you *must* be able to do with the device then it is not a requirement. You can classify however you like, but you can still do everything you could whether with a fixed or removable battery. If battery life is a concern you can get a portable charger.
 You can still buy the old brick phones with longer battery 
 life. Smartphones have taken over but they havent killed that 
 market completely.
Just like you can buy pretty much any old thing, obviously markets don't get 100% killed, nobody here is talking about complete, absolute annihilation of the PC to the point that is doesn't exist anymore...
Markets get "adjusted", some things get killed, AFAIK you cant buy VHS recorders any more, but you can still buy vinyl records. In fact the market for vinyl has grown almost 100% in the last 10 years. Weird but true, people buy stuff for all sorts of reasons.
 It's not about phones overtaking desktops in the market, 
 that's long past, it's about phones killing the desktop market 
 completely.
You're just playing on words here.
No I'm not, it's what Joakim has been saying all along, and as you used the same language it's fair to assume you meant the same as he did.
 All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesnt do 
 something you **require** it to do. If I'm doing pro audio 
 Android is useless, no hardware, not enough processing power, 
 no DAW apps. Doesn't matter if it has an amazing screen, 3 
 sims, year long battery, etc etc..
Correction: "All the advantages in the world are no good if it doesn't do something MOST PEOPLE **require** it to do". I personally wanted phones to always have a removable battery, but I'm not representative of the whole population.
If I require an 12 channel balanced audio interface, I wont buy a ****ing phone because it cant do that. If you require a removable battery and cant find a phone that has one, you will still buy a phone with a fixed battery. Because your not buying it to charge batteries. Its a different thing.
 You're doing pro audio. Do most people in the world do pro 
 audio ?
 I think not.
Apple survived for 20 years just selling computers mostly to the pro-audio and publishing industry, its a big market.
 "no hardware": if it exists in this plane of the universe, so 
 it must have hardware in some way, don't you think ?
 "not enough processing power": IIRC the very beginning of this 
 train-wreck of a thread was the fact that processing power on 
 smartphones is constantly increasing... So that's probably just 
 a matter of time.
If Sony came out with a PS5 tomorrow that had 100X the power of the PS4 you think all the developers and users would "nah that's too much man, we wouldnt know what to do with it, 10X is all we need" Or would they be creaming their pants thinking of all the cool shit that can be done with that kind of processing power. Pro audio is that, so is video, so is PC gaming.
Sep 20 2018
prev sibling parent reply Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 08:15:39 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 [snip]
I apologize for the tone I'm using, I shouldn't jump on that train. I'll clarify my position on this: I'm not completely absolutely sure that smartphones will kill the PC market, but I do think it's a possibility that just can't be dismissed.
Sep 20 2018
next sibling parent reply Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 10:02:05 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
 On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 08:15:39 UTC, Dave Jones 
 wrote:
 [snip]
I apologize for the tone I'm using, I shouldn't jump on that train. I'll clarify my position on this: I'm not completely absolutely sure that smartphones will kill the PC market, but I do think it's a possibility that just can't be dismissed.
No need to apologise, I didnt pick up any "tone". FWIW I agree with your position in the long term. I mean I dont think we can predict 15 years from now what computing will look like. Most everything said in this thread could be irrelevant by then.
Sep 20 2018
parent Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 13:33:31 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 No need to apologise, I didnt pick up any "tone".
I felt like I sounded aggressive; I tend to get worked up very quickly over nothing sometimes. ("this train-wreck of a thread"...)
 FWIW I agree with your position in the long term. I mean I dont 
 think we can predict 15 years from now what computing will look 
 like. Most everything said in this thread could be irrelevant 
 by then.
Yep. Besides, I probably shouldn't even talk about such things, I'm not really qualified to talk about markets and all that, so I'll stop here. In the 80's, some people thought we would have personal flying cars by now; instead we have mini-computers in our pockets that are more powerful than what was used to send people to the moon. Technology is simply unpredictable sometimes...
Sep 20 2018
prev sibling parent reply RhyS <sale rhysoft.com> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 10:02:05 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
 I apologize for the tone I'm using, I shouldn't jump on that 
 train.
 I'll clarify my position on this: I'm not completely absolutely 
 sure that smartphones will kill the PC market, but I do think 
 it's a possibility that just can't be dismissed.
The PC market will change but dying is a big word. PC sales have dropped over the years for multiple reasons: * Adoption of smartphones and tablets * PC hardware getting so powerful, that people have little reason to upgrade * Consoles taking over PC for couch gaming But ... PC are a integral part of our daily business life. This is a market where PC decline is hard simply because the flexibility that PCs offer. You can do a lot with a smartphone and tablet but a lot of those tasks are way harder or time consuming then doing them on a PC. I can install termux on my phone but no way i will program for hours on a 6" screen. Let alone all the IDE and debugging tools i that are not available ( lets not start Vim discussions, thank you very much ). You can attach a keyboard to your phone, a bigger screen to your phone and you have half a PC. But you are still missing the software... We will probably move to a hybrid solution like this in the future, where people can use their smartphones as PCs ( with attachments for productivity ) but its a LONG road to get even close to the same level that a basic PC offers in terms of power and flexibility. A smartphone is nothing else then a smaller tablet, what is nothing else then a less flexible laptop, what is nothing else then a compacter and not flexible PC. Just basic concept like multi windows handling is like a alien idea on smartphones and badly done. Even Windows 3.1 was more capable on this part. Currently smartphones are not designed for the creativity and flexibility you need. Can they become this? Sure ... but not with the current mobile operating systems. Android is a resource hog ( JVM thank you very much ) that uses more memory then my Windows 10 installation while offering less flexibility! Microsoft tried and fell flat on their face. Its possible we may see devices that are plenty powerful to do day to day tasks and see PCs become specialized tools requiring (high paid) experts. But smartphones will always be limited with cooling and power usage compared to a full blown pc. The only way to mitigate this is by having servers offload intensive tasks. I do not see PCs dying out, just changing in nature. A smartphone is a PC, just one that is less flexible and is power limited because of its size. And that law will always be true. If you can put X power in a small device, you can put X * 10 in a bigger device, you can put X * 100 in a even bigger device. And do not be so sure that ARM is the future... I have several NUCs around here and those things are darn powerful ( think 8 year old PC ) these days, with a very low power usage ( 6W ). And Risk-V is coming up... The PC world as we know, never stops changing. But predictions that X will die are wrong. They simply evolve. A Smartphone/Tablet is a PC, so anybody making claims how PCs are dying, is simply stating that PCs are simple evolving into different forms. And by the way, smartphone sales are also starting to plateau because people are less fast on replacing their phones these days. If it was not for the battery dying on people, people will hold on for years these days. Wait until we have electric cars and those batteries *ha*... forced redundant, you bet your ass on it. So do not be so happy about PCs changing because the change is not in the interest of the consumer. No reuse, forced redundancy, ... Great for companies, bad for consumers like us.
Sep 20 2018
parent Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 21 September 2018 at 00:55:25 UTC, RhyS wrote:
 The PC market will change but dying is a big word.
So I'm stuck between "smartphones overtaking PC's" which I've been told has already happened, and "PC's dying" which apparently has too strong of a meaning...
 PC sales have dropped over the years for multiple reasons:

 * Adoption of smartphones and tablets
 * PC hardware getting so powerful, that people have little 
 reason to upgrade
 * Consoles taking over PC for couch gaming

 But ...

 PC are a integral part of our daily business life. This is a 
 market where PC decline is hard simply because the flexibility 
 that PCs offer.

 You can do a lot with a smartphone and tablet but a lot of 
 those tasks are way harder or time consuming then doing them on 
 a PC.
Things can evolve. Maybe in the future we'll simply talk to our phones all the time with good enough voice command software instead of typing on a keyboard ? Who knows.
 I can install termux on my phone but no way i will program for 
 hours on a 6" screen. Let alone all the IDE and debugging tools 
 i that are not available ( lets not start Vim discussions, 
 thank you very much ).
Don't worry, I'm not the one who's going to lecture you on vim being the best editor. I only ever use vim when git launches it to type a commit message (that is... if I haven't set `EDITOR=nano`). However, even if you won't program on a smartphone, maybe future generations of developers could at some point. If some people started learning on a smartphone they could get used to it and just continue on the platform they're comfortable with. (that's really speculation, I have no idea if it could actually happen)
 You can attach a keyboard to your phone, a bigger screen to 
 your phone and you have half a PC. But you are still missing 
 the software...
That can change, software can be ported to Android after all (like LDC).
 We will probably move to a hybrid solution like this in the 
 future, where people can use their smartphones as PCs ( with 
 attachments for productivity ) but its a LONG road to get even 
 close to the same level that a basic PC offers in terms of 
 power and flexibility.
A huge chunk of development nowadays is web development, which doesn't require all that much power AFAIK. You're right on flexibility though.
 A smartphone is nothing else then a smaller tablet, what is 
 nothing else then a less flexible laptop, what is nothing else 
 then a compacter and not flexible PC.

 Just basic concept like multi windows handling is like a alien 
 idea on smartphones and badly done. Even Windows 3.1 was more 
 capable on this part. Currently smartphones are not designed 
 for the creativity and flexibility you need.

 Can they become this? Sure ... but not with the current mobile 
 operating systems. Android is a resource hog ( JVM thank you 
 very much ) that uses more memory then my Windows 10 
 installation while offering less flexibility! Microsoft tried 
 and fell flat on their face.
Out of curiosity, how did you come to such a situation regarding Android vs Windows 10 ? Win 10 on my machine takes at least 2Gb of RAM, Android certainly doesn't on my phone...
 Its possible we may see devices that are plenty powerful to do 
 day to day tasks and see PCs become specialized tools requiring 
 (high paid) experts. But smartphones will always be limited 
 with cooling and power usage compared to a full blown pc. The 
 only way to mitigate this is by having servers offload 
 intensive tasks.
Just like desktop computers will always be limited with cooling and power usage compared to any super-computer from the NASA.
 I do not see PCs dying out, just changing in nature. A 
 smartphone is a PC, just one that is less flexible and is power 
 limited because of its size. And that law will always be true. 
 If you can put X power in a small device, you can put X * 10 in 
 a bigger device, you can put X * 100 in a even bigger device.
That law will always be true, yes. But if we can cram more and more in terms of power in less and less in terms of size, at some point we could have enough power in a very small device.
 And do not be so sure that ARM is the future... I have several 
 NUCs around here and those things are darn powerful ( think 8 
 year old PC ) these days, with a very low power usage ( 6W ). 
 And Risk-V is coming up...
I never said anything about ARM being the future.
 The PC world as we know, never stops changing. But predictions 
 that X will die are wrong. They simply evolve. A 
 Smartphone/Tablet is a PC, so anybody making claims how PCs are 
 dying, is simply stating that PCs are simple evolving into 
 different forms.
You're right; that was a wrong wording again. I should have talked about "classic desktop computers" instead of just "PC". (but "PC" is shorter to write and I'm lazy)
 And by the way, smartphone sales are also starting to plateau 
 because people are less fast on replacing their phones these 
 days. If it was not for the battery dying on people, people 
 will hold on for years these days. Wait until we have electric 
 cars and those batteries *ha*... forced redundant, you bet your 
 ass on it. So do not be so happy about PCs changing because the 
 change is not in the interest of the consumer. No reuse, forced 
 redundancy, ... Great for companies, bad for consumers like us.
I never said I was happy with this potential change. I know that a lot of companies care about money and not about their consumers, and I also don't fancy the idea of working on a smartphone. But just because I don't like it doesn't mean it can't happen...
Sep 21 2018
prev sibling parent Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Thursday, 20 September 2018 at 05:45:52 UTC, Laurent Tréguier 
wrote:
 Why did the iPhone, and after that the smartphone industry as a 
 whole, completely crush the classic cell phones when they have 
 such a poor battery life? Smartphones don't have everything 
 previous phones had. The pros simply outweighed the cons.
The iPhone became a status symbol very quickly. That drove adoption much better than mere features could.
Sep 20 2018
prev sibling parent Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Monday, 17 September 2018 at 15:47:14 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:41:41 UTC, tide wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I say that almost 30% drop in PC sales over the last 7
Might be, but so is trying to convince everyone your predictions are correct so they will focus their work on the issues important to you.
Not at all, because if my predictions are correct, this language will disappear along with the PC platform it's built on. And I've never suggested anybody work on anything "important to [me]," my original post even stated that D may never do well on mobile.
You are making your arguments to fit your desires.
 Plateaus almost never happen, it's not the natural order of 
 things.
OK the market stabilises.
I don't see how you changing the word you used changes anything about the underlying phenomenon: that doesn't happen.
You're seriously suggesting that markets never stabilise, say oil prices stay steady for a few years or some such?
 Most households have more devices than ever before, and 
 hardware is only getting cheaper. The idea that people will 
 have to choose just one device is plainly wrong.
You need to get out in the world a bit more. The majority of smartphones these days are bought in emerging markets where _nobody in their home has ever owned a PC or used the internet_. I've talked to these working stiffs in developing markets, you clearly haven't.
And what happens when the emerging markets mature? Do they still just cling on to one smart phone in the house? Or are they yearning for more technology?
 I find it strange that you think the PC won't also be rolled 
 up by mobile like this.
Can you put a 3GB hard drive in your phone?
Why would I ever want to do this when I noted my phone has 128 GBs of space? ;) If you mean 3 _TB_, yes, I simply attach my slim 1 TB external drive and back up whatever I want over USB 3.0.
So you're not averse to having some external hardware sat on your desk. Hmmm.
 Or a high end graphics card?
Smartphones come with very powerful graphics cards these days, plenty powerful enough to drive lots of graphic loads.
Not if you're into high end gaming.
Or a soundcard with balanced outputs?
Some phones come with high-end DACs and the like, or you could always attach something externally if you really needed to.
There's no such thing as professional audio breakout box for android AFAIK. Up until a few years ago the problem was Android couldn't do low latency audio, I'm not sure if the situation has changed.
 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide29.jpg
And how does that contradict anything I said?
It contradicts your statement... "print is pretty much dead" If you can make the argument that print is dead and ebooks booming when print still outsells ebooks in unit sales 2 to 1, and even more than that if you look at revenue then you need to see a shrink. :)
 ebooks have peaked while print keeps growing, whereas the 
 article I linked and this guy's data show ebooks growing and 
 print continuing to decline.
You didnt read the article carefully enough. The growth is in "adult fiction", the market as a whole has fallen.
 I never said ebook sales had passed print yet, only linked to 
 that article saying that it's hard to measure now but it's 
 likely print is still declining, and that print is effectively 
 dead, as it's only going to keep declining into irrelevance.
So it's hard to measure but it's definitely going to die. LOL.
 and yes that's with indie published books included.

 Another interesting thing from that report was the average 
 price of indie ebooks was $2.95

 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide26.jpg

 So even selling ebooks for peanuts cant catch them up.
They aren't selling them for "peanuts," they've simply stripped out a bunch of legacy costs like paper, editors, publishers, and the like. The reason authors still prefer indie ebooks is they get more money per book even at that lower price, as the rest of the supply chain and distribution had squeezed them down to only 5-15% of the much higher print price.
How much profit the author makes is irrelevant. The point is you can buy an ebook for an average of $2.95 or a print book for (uninformed guess) $8. And yet more people still choose the print book. And this is what even now you dont understand. People like real books, they like the feel of it the immediacy, the intimacy. They like their kindles too. It's not one or the other. I cant believe you dont understand that.
Sep 17 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent tide <tide tide.tide> writes:
That is, it is not just the performance that affects the sales of 
phones. There's a lot of factors that lead to there being new 
phones sales. Know someone that's gone through 3 phones in 
comparison to just the one I have. Treadmills eat phones for 
breakfast.
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling parent Dave Jones <dave jones.com> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:11:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 10:25:30 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:

 Some analysts have predicted that PC sales will plateau at 
 some point and if that's where we're at now then 30% drop in 
 shipments is not death of the market.
I see no reason why they would plateau, looks like wishful thinking to me.
Might be, but so is trying to convince everyone your predictions are correct so they will focus their work on the issues important to you.
 I think a large part of it is that PCs got fast enough for 
 most people about 7-10 years ago. So it was a combination of 
 mobile, and people no longer needing to get newer faster 
 machines. The upgrade cycle moved from "I need a newer faster 
 computer" to "I'll wait till my current system is worn out". 
 (For a lot of people anyway)
Sure, that's part of it, but that suggests that once smartphones reach that performance threshold, they will replace PCs altogether. I think we've reached that threshold now.
If it was just about performance, but it's not.
 And just because there's been a trend for 5 or 6 years 
 doesnt mean it will continue so inevitably.
Sure, but these trends almost never reverse. ;)
It doesnt need to reverse for "the PC is dead" to be false.
Plateaus almost never happen, it's not the natural order of things.
OK the market stabilises.
 Because for about £300 you can get an intel NUC system with 
 120GB SSD, which is more powerful and more upgradeable than 
 your £700 mobile device. And some people still want that. And 
 because most people have more than one TV, some have multiple 
 phones, phones and tablets, and desktops, and multiple games 
 consoles. And they still use them all in different situations.
That's more on the high end, where people use many devices. On the low- to mid-end of the market, where most of the sales happen, people are happy to buy fewer devices that get the job done.
Most households have more devices than ever before, and hardware is only getting cheaper. The idea that people will have to choose just one device is plainly wrong.
 I find it strange that you think the PC won't also be rolled up 
 by mobile like this.
Can you put a 3GB hard drive in your phone? Or a high end graphics card? Or a soundcard with balanced outputs?
 Yes you can bring up examples of people who made mistakes 
 predicting the future but that works both ways. You're just 
 as guilty of seeing a two points and drawing a straight line 
 though them.
Except none of these examples or my own prediction are based on simple extrapolation between data points. Rather, we're analyzing the underlying technical details and capabilities and coming to different conclusions about whether the status quo is likely to remain. So I don't think any of us are "guilty" of your charge.
Of course you are, you're making predictions and assuming the trends will continue, you assume the technical details are all important. Im saying they are only part of it, that people have requirements / preferences outside of how powerful the device is. Lots of people were predicting ebooks would kill the real book market a few years back, turns out people still prefer to have an actual paper book to read, ebooks peaked a few years ago and real books have been in growth ever since. That was people seeing a trend and assuming it would continue just like you are.
No, print is pretty much dead, it's just hard to track because so many ebooks have gone indie now: https://www.geekwire.com/2018/traditional-publishers-ebook-sales-drop-indie-authors-amazon-take-off/ What are these magical "requirements/preferences" that you cannot name, that you believe will keep print alive? That will be really funny. :)
You obviously didn't research thoroughly enough, the site that was the source for the geekwire article shows quite clearly that print books still outsell ebooks almost twice over. http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide29.jpg and yes that's with indie published books included. Another interesting thing from that report was the average price of indie ebooks was $2.95 http://authorearnings.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Slide26.jpg So even selling ebooks for peanuts cant catch them up.
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling parent reply Neia Neutuladh <neia ikeran.org> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 10:25:30 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 Because for about £300 you can get an intel NUC system with 
 120GB SSD, which is more powerful and more upgradeable than 
 your £700 mobile device. And some people still want that.
For the typical person, it's more likely that they'll get a laptop and replace the whole thing at once instead of upgrading. And a new rise of convergence devices would reduce laptop ownership. Better network connectivity and cloud-based gaming would erode another segment of powerful personal computers. That could also impact things like content editing -- Adobe Creative Cloud might actually be entirely cloud-based eventually. Which is a mild improvement in that you wouldn't need a good computer to run Premiere Pro, but a large problem for actually being able to access your data and products you've purchased. It angers both the EFF and digital archivists. Anyway, it's at least moderately plausible that, thirty years from now, desktop computers will be considered specialized gear.
Sep 16 2018
parent tide <tide tide.tide> writes:
On Sunday, 16 September 2018 at 15:56:25 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
wrote:
 Better network connectivity and cloud-based gaming would erode 
 another segment of powerful personal computers.
I wish companies actually cared for providing better networks. But the truth is they are fine charging for their overpriced internet packages as it stands. They don't get anything out of providing better internet for cheaper. The output of throughput you would need for something like 4k gaming or 144hz. I don't ever see (at least america's) internet structure supporting that in 30 years.
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Patrick Schluter <Patrick.Schluter bbox.fr> writes:
On Saturday, 15 September 2018 at 15:25:55 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 You've probably heard of the possibly apocryphal story of how 
 Blackberry and Nokia engineers disassembled the first iPhone 
 and dismissed it because it only got a day of battery life, 
 while their devices lasted much longer. They thought the 
 mainstream market would care about such battery life as much as 
 their early adopters, but they were wrong.
It they'd ask me they would have known. I was a very late adopter of mobile phone and got my first phone in 2000. It was the used Siemens E10D of my brother. It had maximum 1 day of battery life. Then I got at work an Alcatel then a Nokia with ludicrously long battery life, nearly 2 weeks. Result -> my Siemens was always charged properly and I was always reachable. With the others, they were always crapping out on me at the most inapropriate times. With the short battery life, you would never forget to put it on charge. With the long battery life, you would always wait till it's too late.
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling parent Gambler <MyNickname ks2.ru> writes:
On 9/15/2018 11:25 AM, Joakim wrote:
 On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
 (Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X
 that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young:
Yeah but 90% of the time people spend on mobile is just dicking about. Sending IMs, facebook, point and click games. And thats a huge part of the usage stats, people can now spend more time online wasting time in more situations than ever before.
And people don't use PCs for such things? ;) I know a lot of people who did, which explains the 28% drop in PC sales since they peaked in 2011, the year after the iPad came out. Many of those people who used to buy PCs have switched to tablets and other mobile devices.
 PCs are generally seen a tool to accomplish tasks, for word processing
 or a high end gaming thing, audio / video editing, mobile is more
 entertainment. Not many people are doing what you are by using your
 mobile as a desktop.

 I'm not saying that makes mobile worthless, what I'm saying is that
 your hypothesis is like saying TV has taken over from typewriters.
More like when computers first started replacing typewriters, I'm sure many laughed at that possibility back then too. :)
Sure. Xerox production department sabotaged the initial release of Alto, because they were invested in "smart" typewriters. But I don't think this is a valid analogy. Here is mine. PCs are like books, while tablets and phones are like TV. TV is a more modern medium, but it's highly centralized and strips the audience of control. A successful TV program usually reaches more people than a book, but television has much higher barrier of entry for creators. Moreover, while it is theoretically possible to learn something by watching TV, in practice it's oriented towards "news" and entertainment and _this matters_. So should we celebrate dwindling books sales and multi-million ratings of some morning show simply because the show makes a lot of money? Should we encourage underdeveloped countries "skip" books and move "directly" to TV?
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling parent aberba <karabutaworld gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 14 September 2018 at 09:23:24 UTC, Dave Jones wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:56:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Thursday, 13 September 2018 at 22:41:08 UTC, Nick 
 Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
 On 09/10/2018 11:13 PM, tide wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 That's why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are 
 now 6-7X that per year:
This shouldn't be misunderstood as such, which I think you as misunderstanding it. The reason mobile sales are so high is because of planned obsolescence and the walled garden that these devices are built around. I've gone through maybe 3-4 phones in the time that I've had my Desktop, and I use my desktop every single day. I don't need to buy a new one cause it runs perfectly fine, there aren't operating system updates that purposely cause the CPU to run slower to "save battery life" when a new device and OS come out. That's not to say it isn't insignificant but the sales numbers are exacerbated.
Right. Basically, "sales stats" should never be misconstrued as "usage stats".
The usage stats are similarly overwhelming, two-thirds of digital time is spent on mobile, more for the young:
Yeah but 90% of the time people spend on mobile is just dicking about. Sending IMs, facebook, point and click games. And thats a huge part of the usage stats, people can now spend more time online wasting time in more situations than ever before. PCs are generally seen a tool to accomplish tasks, for word processing or a high end gaming thing, audio / video editing, mobile is more entertainment. Not many people are doing what you are by using your mobile as a desktop. I'm not saying that makes mobile worthless, what I'm saying is that your hypothesis is like saying TV has taken over from typewriters.
Do you realize most Chromebooks use ARM and have recently recorded more sales/usage that Windows in some cases? I several enterprises are adopting use of tablet for on-the-go tasks and administrative work (especially when combined with the mini-keyboards). Things are really shifting to ARM. Another is some that looks exactly like tablets and either run android or chrome OS. See this slick Pixelbook from Google: https://store.google.com/us/product/google_pixelbook
Sep 15 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply passenger <passenger a.net> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 At my workplace six years ago, the developers were all 
 allocated a core i5 ultrabook- likely with 4 GBs of RAM and a 
 128 GB SSD, though I don't remember those specs- and a 27" 
 2560X1440 display with which to get our work done. I was pretty 
 happy with the display, the best I'd ever used to that point. 
 I'm guessing the setup cost my employer a couple thousand 
 dollars per developer.

 I picked up an Android/AArch64 smartphone earlier this year, 
 with 6 GBs of RAM, 128 GBs of flash, a Snapdragon 835 octa-core 
 CPU, and a 5.5" 2560X1440 display. This is the fastest computer 
 I've ever owned, and it fits in 6 cubic inches and weighs a 
 little more than a third of a pound. It cost me approximately 
 $700.

 That is a stunning change in mobile capabilities in just six 
 years, where what used to be a mobile developer workstation now 
 comes packed into a smartphone at a fraction of the cost.

 If you think the phone doesn't actually perform, I borrowed a 
 2015-model Macbook Air with a core i5 and 4 GBs of RAM and 
 built the last pure C++ version of ldc, 0.17, using both cores 
 with `-ninja -j5`. It took two minutes with clang from 
 Homebrew, the same amount of time it takes me to build the same 
 source on my smartphone with clang by running `ninja -j9`.

 This phone has been my development hardware since early this 
 year, by pairing it with a $30 bluetooth keyboard and a $5 
 stand to hold it up. I'm typing this long forum post up on it 
 now.

 Tech companies are starting to realize this and going after the 
 desktop/laptop PC markets with various 64-bit ARM products:

 https://www.engadget.com/2018/08/09/samsung-galaxy-note-9-dex/
 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/08/samsungs-tab-s4-is-both-an-android-tablet-and-a-desktop-computer/
 https://youtube.com/watch?v=uLvIAskVSUM
 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13309/lenovo-yoga-c630-snapdragon-850-windows

 That last link notes 25 hours of battery life with a 
 Windows/AArch64 laptop, one of the key benefits of ARM, which 
 is why even Microsoft has come around.

 Yes, I know, these devices won't replace your quad-core Xeon 
 workstation with 32-64 GBs of RAM anytime soon, but most people 
 don't need anywhere near that level of compute. That's why PC 
 sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X that per 
 year:

 https://www.businessinsider.com/PC-sales-are-continuing-to-slump-fewer-are-sold-now-than-when-the-iPhone-launched/articleshow/62547330.cms
 https://www.androidauthority.com/smartphone-sales-idc-2018-871363/

 Most of those mobile devices running iOS have AArch64 CPUs, and 
 google said last December that "over 40% of Android devices 
 coming online have 64-bit support," which is why they're 
 requiring apps with native libraries to support it by next fall:

 https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2017/12/improving-app-security-and-performance.html

 D now has mostly working AArch64 support, with the ldc 1.11 
 release last month:

 https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/tag/v1.11.0

 That is the result of years of intermittent AArch64 patches 
 added by the core teams of ldc and gdc- David, Iain, Kai, 
 Johannes, Dan, and others- to which I recently added some 
 Android patches. You too can pitch in with the few remaining 
 issues or try out the AArch64 support with your own D code.

 This company provides a free linux/AArch64 CI for OSS projects, 
 LDC uses it:

 http://blog.shippable.com/shippable-arm-packet-deliver-native-ci-cd-for-arm-architecture

 Despite all this, D may never do very well on mobile or 
 AArch64, even though I think it's well-suited for that market. 
 But at the very least, you should be looking at mobile and 
 AArch64, as they're taking over the computing market.
Is it possible to develop versus a NVidia Jetson, CUDA included?
Sep 11 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:42:38 UTC, passenger wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 [...]
Is it possible to develop versus a NVidia Jetson, CUDA included?
I think so, but I doubt anyone has ever actually tried it: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/autonomous-machines/embedded-systems-dev-kits-modules/ As for CUDA, Nicholas Wilson said recently that he could do something with it for his DCompute project with ldc, but no idea what the current status is: https://forum.dlang.org/post/slijjptlxdrfgvoyahsk forum.dlang.org
Sep 11 2018
parent Nicholas Wilson <iamthewilsonator hotmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:52:45 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Tuesday, 11 September 2018 at 07:42:38 UTC, passenger wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 [...]
Is it possible to develop versus a NVidia Jetson, CUDA included?
I think so, but I doubt anyone has ever actually tried it: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/autonomous-machines/embedded-systems-dev-kits-modules/ As for CUDA, Nicholas Wilson said recently that he could do something with it for his DCompute project with ldc, but no idea what the current status is: https://forum.dlang.org/post/slijjptlxdrfgvoyahsk forum.dlang.org
I'm about to release v0.2, ETA 1 week, with math functions and a API that asserts that you use it correctly (i.e. less reliant on driver error codes which is therefore easier to develop for).
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent Dejan Lekic <dejan.lekic gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence. ...
I mostly agree with you, Joakim. I own a very nice (but now old) ODROID U2 (check the ODROID XU4 or C2!) so ARM support is important for me... Also, check this: https://www.hardkernel.com/main/products/prdt_info.php?g_code=G152875062626 HOWEVER, I think Iain is right - PPC64 and RISC-V are becoming more and more popular nowadays and may become more popular than ARM in the future but that future is unclear.
Sep 11 2018
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Gambler <MyNickname ks2.ru> writes:
On 9/10/2018 9:43 AM, Joakim wrote:
 Yes, I know, these devices won't replace your quad-core Xeon workstation
 with 32-64 GBs of RAM anytime soon, but most people don't need anywhere
 near that level of compute. That's why PC sales keep dropping while
 mobile sales are now 6-7X that per year:
I'm all for supporting modern open CPU architectures. At the same time, I fear that the specific trend you're describing here (people ditching PCs for cellphones/tablets) is effectively a reversal of the PC revolution. For the last 30+ years people benefited from "trickle down computing". They had access to PCs that were equivalent to cutting edge servers of 6-7 years prior. They had ability to choose their operating system, expand and upgrade their hardware and install any software they wanted. All of this is breaking down right now. Intel got lazy without competition and high-end CPU architectures stagnated. All the cutting-edge computing is done on NVidia cards today. It requires hundreds of gigabytes of RAM, tens of terabytes of data and usage of specialized computing libraries. I very much doubt this will "trickle down" to mobile in foreseeable future. Heck, most developer laptops today have no CUDA capabilities to speak of. Moreover, mobile devices are locked down by default and it's no trivial task to break out of those walled gardens. IIRC, Apple has an official policy of not allowing programming tools in their app store. Alan Kay had to personally petition Steve Jobs to allow Scratch to be distributed, so kids could learn programming. I believe the general policy is still in place. Android is better, but it's still a horror to do real work on, compared to any PC OS. Fine, you rooted it, installed some compilers and so on. How will you share your software with fellow Android users? In essence, we are seeing the rapid widening of two digital divides. The first one is between users and average developers. The second one is between average developers and researchers at companies like Google. I very much doubt that we will see an equivalent of today's high-end machine learning server on user's desk, let alone in anyone's pocket, within 7 years. My only hope is that newer AMD processors and popularity of VR rigs may help narrow these divides.
Sep 11 2018
next sibling parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 06:41:38 UTC, Gambler wrote:
[snip]
 In essence, we are seeing the rapid widening of two digital 
 divides. The first one is between users and average developers. 
 The second one is between average developers and researchers at 
 companies like Google. I very much doubt that we will see an 
 equivalent of today's high-end machine learning server on 
 user's desk, let alone in anyone's pocket, within 7 years.
I don't think it's necessarily gonna be like the late 80's PC "revolution" that led to ever more powerful machines being available to the average home user. But most definitely people are switching to mobile, especially because most phones are now powerful enough to do what people used PCs for: internet, email, streaming and even gaming. Then you have speech recognition and text to speech on Android and iOS which makes mobile phones attractive for the visually impaired, and it fits into your pocket. There may be additional benefits in places like Africa where you might not be able to set up PCs and laptops everywhere (which is true even of first world countries). Think of money transfer via apps. I think that's a huge thing in some places in Africa. It's not just about the processing power, it's about convenience. The first question you often hear is "Is there an app for it too?" And even if ARM is replaced someday, the mobile market will remain strong, just with a different architecture - and then D has to cater for that too.
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 06:41:38 UTC, Gambler wrote:
 On 9/10/2018 9:43 AM, Joakim wrote:
 Yes, I know, these devices won't replace your quad-core Xeon 
 workstation with 32-64 GBs of RAM anytime soon, but most 
 people don't need anywhere near that level of compute. That's 
 why PC sales keep dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X 
 that per year:
I'm all for supporting modern open CPU architectures. At the same time, I fear that the specific trend you're describing here (people ditching PCs for cellphones/tablets) is effectively a reversal of the PC revolution. For the last 30+ years people benefited from "trickle down computing". They had access to PCs that were equivalent to cutting edge servers of 6-7 years prior. They had ability to choose their operating system, expand and upgrade their hardware and install any software they wanted. All of this is breaking down right now.
Yes and no, it is true that that is the way tech _used_ to diffuse. However, do you know what the largest tech company in the world is right now? It's not IBM, Apple, HP, or Microsoft, ie none of the server or PC companies. It's Apple, which doesn't sell into the server or traditional enterprise markets almost at all and only has 15-20% unit share in the mobile market. In other words, consumer tech markets are _much_ larger than the server/enterprise markets that used to lead tech R&D, which means consumer tech like mobile is what leads the way now. As for choosing your own OS, that's still possible, but as always, it can be tough to get drivers for your hardware: https://together.jolla.com/question/136143/wiki-available-devices-running-sailfish-os/ And if you simply want to tinker with the Android OS on your device, there are many ways to do that: https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-install-custom-rom-android/ No need to expand and upgrade your hardware when prices keep dropping in this Darwinian market. There's now a $500 phone with a faster chip than the one I got just 7 months back for $700: https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16875220078 As for installing any software you want, Android allows it: it's how I debug the apps I build on my phone or tablet. The iPhone doesn't, but it's a minority of the mobile market.
 Intel got lazy without competition and high-end CPU 
 architectures stagnated. All the cutting-edge computing is done 
 on NVidia cards today. It requires hundreds of gigabytes of 
 RAM, tens of terabytes of data and usage of specialized 
 computing libraries. I very much doubt this will "trickle down" 
 to mobile in foreseeable future. Heck, most developer laptops 
 today have no CUDA capabilities to speak of.
I question the need for such "cutting-edge computing" in the first place, but regardless, it has already moved down to mobile and other edge devices: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/10/the-pixel-2-contains-a-custom-google-soc-the-pixel-visual-core/ https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/26/17616140/google-edge-tpu-on-device-ai-machine-learning-devkit
 Moreover, mobile devices are locked down by default and it's no 
 trivial task to break out of those walled gardens. IIRC, Apple 
 has an official policy of not allowing programming tools in 
 their app store. Alan Kay had to personally petition Steve Jobs 
 to allow Scratch to be distributed, so kids could learn 
 programming. I believe the general policy is still in place.
They have their own app for that now: https://www.apple.com/swift/playgrounds/
 Android is better, but it's still a horror to do real work on, 
 compared to any PC OS. Fine, you rooted it, installed some 
 compilers and so on. How will you share your software with 
 fellow Android users?
You seem to have missed all the posts I've made here before about native Android support for ldc: :) _I have never rooted any of my Android devices_. Compiling D code on most any Android device is as simple as installing an app from the official Play Store and typing a single command, `apt install ldc`: https://wiki.dlang.org/Build_D_for_Android The instructions there even show you how to package up an Android GUI app, an apk, on Android itself, by using some other packages available in that Android app.
 In essence, we are seeing the rapid widening of two digital 
 divides. The first one is between users and average developers. 
 The second one is between average developers and researchers at 
 companies like Google. I very much doubt that we will see an 
 equivalent of today's high-end machine learning server on 
 user's desk, let alone in anyone's pocket, within 7 years.
I disagree on both counts. First off, people were running supercomputers and UNIX workstations while you were piddling along on your PC decades ago. That changed nothing about what you were able to learn and accomplish on your PC. In fact, you were probably much better off than they were, as the PC skills you picked up were likely in much more demand than their supercomputing abilities. ;) It's similar today. Billions of people can now access programming through that open-source Termux app that can be installed on almost any Android device. That's _HUGE_ for the user, and D is one of only about 15 programming languages currently available in that app, and one of only 5 that eventually compile down to native assembly, alongside Vala, Go, C, and C++. As for machine learning researchers and the like, I think that's way overhyped, as this guy says: https://blog.piekniewski.info/2018/05/28/ai-winter-is-well-on-its-way/ I'm confident that the app market will continue being much larger than the cloud/research market you're concerned about, though both are due for a shakeout.
 My only hope is that newer AMD processors and popularity of VR 
 rigs may help narrow these divides.
I doubt either of those will matter at all anytime soon. On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:51:17 UTC, Chris wrote:
 On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 08:09:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 I don't fault google for making those choices, as nobody has a 
 right to their OSS contributions, but it is something to 
 consider when using any platform, and even more so for an OSS 
 project: who is funding this and why? Will their model be 
 sustainable?

 There are no easy answers here: if you want a free-priced, OSS 
 toolchain, you're going to be marching to the beat of 
 someone's drum.
We all understand that. But often you don't get to choose. If the user wants an app for Android/iOS what you're gonna tell him or her? "I'm not marching to the beat of Google's drum."? Also, having no or no smooth support for something doesn't make the D community "rebels".
Heh, that's not what I was saying at all: in fact, my point was that you're still marching to a bunch of random volunteers' drums with D. ;) And the drumbeat comment referred to toolchains, so I wasn't saying that in regard to D supporting a platform like Android/iOS, only that you should know how they're funded.
 btw, it was a thread _you_ started that finally spurred me to 
 begin this Android port five years back, though I'd enquired 
 about and had been considering it earlier:

 https://forum.dlang.org/thread/yhulkqvlwnxjklnogmfv forum.dlang.org
Ha ha! I know and you picked up on it. Thank you very much, it's much appreciated. But look at the date: November 2013 (!) and we're still talking about it while others have overtaken D in this respect.
Not Swift, ;) at least not from Apple.
 5 years + the founding of the D Language Foundation. Sometimes 
 it's good to think outside the box a little and see what's 
 going on around you. It's not just fancy ranges and allocators. 
 The software has to actually run somewhere.
Sure, we're both on the same page about the importance of mobile. On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 09:18:46 UTC, Chris wrote:
 From one of the articles you linked:

 "The Apple Swift compiler has had the ability to compile code 
 for the Android platform for a few years now, but it hasn’t 
 made many friends in the developer community owing to its 
 complexity. Our toolchain was designed to solve this problem by 
 taking the complexity and headaches out of the process, so you 
 can focus on building great apps for your users."

 If Android devs have been reluctant to touch Swift owing to its 
 complexity (not the language, the toolchain), do you think they 
 would touch D?
It depends what they mean by that complexity. The official page on Swift for Android that I linked shows that it takes about the same kind of steps to build apps as with D. But that Medium post you quote now says that they're missing some SwiftFoundation pieces on Android, whereas I suspect much less is missing from the D stdlib on Android. They added a JNI generator for Swift, don't think we have one for D yet. They integrate Swift with Android Studio using a Gradle plugin; I've said I do nothing with IDEs. So yes, D is missing some of the polish added by that outside developer to Swift on Android, so depending on which of those Android devs need, they may not want to use it. But at least D supports Android/AArch64 now, which even that more polished toolchain from Readdle doesn't.
Sep 12 2018
next sibling parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at 15:38:36 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 the world is right now? It's not IBM, Apple,
Whoops, meant to write Intel here, but wrote Apple again. :D
Sep 12 2018
prev sibling parent Gambler <MyNickname ks2.ru> writes:
On 9/12/2018 11:38 AM, Joakim wrote:> On Wednesday, 12 September 2018 at
06:41:38 UTC, Gambler wrote:
 On 9/10/2018 9:43 AM, Joakim wrote:
 Yes, I know, these devices won't replace your quad-core Xeon
 workstation with 32-64 GBs of RAM anytime soon, but most people don't
 need anywhere near that level of compute. That's why PC sales keep
 dropping while mobile sales are now 6-7X that per year:
I'm all for supporting modern open CPU architectures. At the same time, I fear that the specific trend you're describing here (people ditching PCs for cellphones/tablets) is effectively a reversal of the PC revolution. For the last 30+ years people benefited from "trickle down computing". They had access to PCs that were equivalent to cutting edge servers of 6-7 years prior. They had ability to choose their operating system, expand and upgrade their hardware and install any software they wanted. All of this is breaking down right now.
Yes and no, it is true that that is the way tech _used_ to diffuse. However, do you know what the largest tech company in the world is right now? It's not IBM, Apple, HP, or Microsoft, ie none of the server or PC companies. It's Apple, which doesn't sell into the server or traditional enterprise markets almost at all and only has 15-20% unit share in the mobile market. In other words, consumer tech markets are _much_ larger than the server/enterprise markets that used to lead tech R&D, which means consumer tech like mobile is what leads the way now. As for choosing your own OS, that's still possible, but as always, it can be tough to get drivers for your hardware:
https://together.jolla.com/question/136143/wiki-available-devices-running-sailfish-os/
 And if you simply want to tinker with the Android OS on your device,
 there are many ways to do that:

 https://www.xda-developers.com/how-to-install-custom-rom-android/

 No need to expand and upgrade your hardware when prices keep dropping in
 this Darwinian market. There's now a $500 phone with a faster chip than
 the one I got just 7 months back for $700:

 https://m.newegg.com/products/N82E16875220078

 As for installing any software you want, Android allows it: it's how I
 debug the apps I build on my phone or tablet. The iPhone doesn't, but
 it's a minority of the mobile market.

 Intel got lazy without competition and high-end CPU architectures
 stagnated. All the cutting-edge computing is done on NVidia cards
 today. It requires hundreds of gigabytes of RAM, tens of terabytes of
 data and usage of specialized computing libraries. I very much doubt
 this will "trickle down" to mobile in foreseeable future. Heck, most
 developer laptops today have no CUDA capabilities to speak of.
I question the need for such "cutting-edge computing" in the first place, but regardless, it has already moved down to mobile and other edge devices:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/10/the-pixel-2-contains-a-custom-google-soc-the-pixel-visual-core/

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/26/17616140/google-edge-tpu-on-device-ai-machine-learning-devkit
 Moreover, mobile devices are locked down by default and it's no
 trivial task to break out of those walled gardens. IIRC, Apple has an
 official policy of not allowing programming tools in their app store.
 Alan Kay had to personally petition Steve Jobs to allow Scratch to be
 distributed, so kids could learn programming. I believe the general
 policy is still in place.
They have their own app for that now: https://www.apple.com/swift/playgrounds/
 Android is better, but it's still a horror to do real work on,
 compared to any PC OS. Fine, you rooted it, installed some compilers
 and so on. How will you share your software with fellow Android users?
You seem to have missed all the posts I've made here before about native Android support for ldc: :) _I have never rooted any of my Android devices_. Compiling D code on most any Android device is as simple as installing an app from the official Play Store and typing a single command, `apt install ldc`: https://wiki.dlang.org/Build_D_for_Android The instructions there even show you how to package up an Android GUI app, an apk, on Android itself, by using some other packages available in that Android app.
 In essence, we are seeing the rapid widening of two digital divides.
 The first one is between users and average developers. The second one
 is between average developers and researchers at companies like
 Google. I very much doubt that we will see an equivalent of today's
 high-end machine learning server on user's desk, let alone in anyone's
 pocket, within 7 years.
I disagree on both counts. First off, people were running supercomputers and UNIX workstations while you were piddling along on your PC decades ago. That changed nothing about what you were able to learn and accomplish on your PC. In fact, you were probably much better off than they were, as the PC skills you picked up were likely in much more demand than their supercomputing abilities. ;) It's similar today. Billions of people can now access programming through that open-source Termux app that can be installed on almost any Android device. That's _HUGE_ for the user, and D is one of only about 15 programming languages currently available in that app, and one of only 5 that eventually compile down to native assembly, alongside Vala, Go, C, and C++. As for machine learning researchers and the like, I think that's way overhyped, as this guy says: https://blog.piekniewski.info/2018/05/28/ai-winter-is-well-on-its-way/ I'm confident that the app market will continue being much larger than the cloud/research market you're concerned about, though both are due for a shakeout.
 My only hope is that newer AMD processors and popularity of VR rigs
 may help narrow these divides.
I doubt either of those will matter at all anytime soon.
You're right about APKs. Not sure whether it changed since I looked into it, or I didn't read the docs correctly in the first place. The overall dev/distribution process, though, still looks... uh, involved compared to compiling and running an executable on PC. In general, I am still convinced of the overall negative effect of mobile devices on computing. They are designed to be used mostly for consumption and social sharing. They have a lot of limitations that currently drag the whole IT ecosystem down. Some excellent high-level criticisms: https://www.fastcompany.com/40435064/what-alan-kay-thinks-about-the-iphone-and-technology-now http://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDesign/ Specific Example #1: Web design had been devastated by touchscreens. Instead of figuring out how to create more powerful interfaces designers spend their mental capacity on how to cram information onto tiny screens of unknown orientation. The vocabulary of reliably available user interactions has shrunk to actions people can do with a single thumb. Worst of all, this is spreading to desktop apps. I've seen in this in my day-to-day job. Specific Example #2: People brought up on mobile devices do not know how to type on a keyboard: http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201803290068.html This is not limited to Japan. Again, I've seen this in real life. Do you think that someone who can't type on a keyboard will be able to use _Unix terminal emulation_ to create software? Termux is a cool project, but it doesn't target "billions of people". It targets a handful of experienced Linux users who want to fiddle with Android. And yes, we do need computing power for new things. I agree with that article on machine learning hype. But that doesn't change the fact that without all the video cards modern machine learning architectures would be impractical, whether or not you consider them particularly useful or good. Computing power was the enabler.
Sep 16 2018
prev sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 [...]
Two more interesting bits of news I saw lately: - The octa-core AArch64 CPU in the latest iPad Pro benchmarks better than last year's core i7 Macbook Pro, a bit behind this year's core i9 Macbook Pro: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/apple-walks-ars-through-the-ipad-pros-a12x-system-on-a-chip/ - Samsung just announced a beta linux app that allows you to run desktop Ubuntu on DeX with the Note 9 or Tab S4: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-s-Linux-on-DeX-will-let-you-run-desktop-Linux-on-your-Android-phone.358061.0.html https://youtube.com/watch?v=SgMHhrO8d8s
Nov 09 2018
next sibling parent test <test gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Two more interesting bits of news I saw lately:

 - The octa-core AArch64 CPU in the latest iPad Pro benchmarks 
 better than last year's core i7 Macbook Pro, a bit behind this 
 year's core i9 Macbook Pro:

 https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/apple-walks-ars-through-the-ipad-pros-a12x-system-on-a-chip/

 - Samsung just announced a beta linux app that allows you to 
 run desktop Ubuntu on DeX with the Note 9 or Tab S4:

 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-s-Linux-on-DeX-will-let-you-run-desktop-Linux-on-your-Android-phone.358061.0.html

 https://youtube.com/watch?v=SgMHhrO8d8s
I hope some one can fix LDC for ios, will bring a lot more user.
Nov 10 2018
prev sibling parent reply Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 [...]
Two more interesting bits of news I saw lately: - The octa-core AArch64 CPU in the latest iPad Pro benchmarks better than last year's core i7 Macbook Pro, a bit behind this year's core i9 Macbook Pro: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/apple-walks-ars-through-the-ipad-pros-a12x-system-on-a-chip/
Not really that impressive, my desktop i5-2500k from like 8 years ago is still faster than the CPU in last years Macbook pro. Intel has been stagnate with their 14nm processors. Even this years CPUs is still based on the same architecture as their CPU from 2-3 years ago. With Ryzen we're expected to see a CPU next year with 64 cores and 128 threads at 7nm. Still nice to see mobile finally catching up to laptops. That GPU performance though, pretty impressive considering how large the heatsinks and amount of fans are on traditional GPUs.
Nov 10 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 11:45:22 UTC, Rubn wrote:
 On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put out 
 for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many are 
 paying attention to this sea change that is going on with 
 computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 [...]
Two more interesting bits of news I saw lately: - The octa-core AArch64 CPU in the latest iPad Pro benchmarks better than last year's core i7 Macbook Pro, a bit behind this year's core i9 Macbook Pro: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/apple-walks-ars-through-the-ipad-pros-a12x-system-on-a-chip/
Not really that impressive, my desktop i5-2500k from like 8 years ago is still faster than the CPU in last years Macbook pro. Intel has been stagnate with their 14nm processors. Even this years CPUs is still based on the same architecture as their CPU from 2-3 years ago.
No, benchmarks show the mobile i7 in last year's MBP as faster than your old desktop core i5, so the iPad Pro is faster than your desktop. :P Of course, the TDP of your desktop i5 is twice the mobile i7 and almost 10 times the A12X in the new iPad Pro, so Apple completely blows away Intel on the performance-to-power-dissipation ratio.
 With Ryzen we're expected to see a CPU next year with 64 cores 
 and 128 threads at 7nm.
There are 64-bit ARM workstations and server cores if you want that: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12571/gigabyte-thunderxstation-cavium-thunderx2-socs
 That GPU performance though, pretty impressive considering how 
 large the heatsinks and amount of fans are on traditional GPUs.
Indeed.
Nov 13 2018
next sibling parent reply Rubn <where is.this> writes:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 17:41:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 11:45:22 UTC, Rubn wrote:
 On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 13:43:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 LDC recently added a linux/AArch64 CI for both its main 
 branches and 64-bit ARM, ie AArch64, builds have been put 
 out for both linux and Android. It does not seem that many 
 are paying attention to this sea change that is going on 
 with computing though, so let me lay out some evidence.

 [...]
Two more interesting bits of news I saw lately: - The octa-core AArch64 CPU in the latest iPad Pro benchmarks better than last year's core i7 Macbook Pro, a bit behind this year's core i9 Macbook Pro: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/11/apple-walks-ars-through-the-ipad-pros-a12x-system-on-a-chip/
Not really that impressive, my desktop i5-2500k from like 8 years ago is still faster than the CPU in last years Macbook pro. Intel has been stagnate with their 14nm processors. Even this years CPUs is still based on the same architecture as their CPU from 2-3 years ago.
No, benchmarks show the mobile i7 in last year's MBP as faster than your old desktop core i5, so the iPad Pro is faster than your desktop. :P Of course, the TDP of your desktop i5 is twice the mobile i7 and almost 10 times the A12X in the new iPad Pro, so Apple completely blows away Intel on the performance-to-power-dissipation ratio.
Which benchmarks did you look at, cause I have mine overclocked past 4 GHz. Not faster than my desktop where it counts, at least for me (the gpu). Nothing really needs that much more power for CPU, and single thread performance hasn't gone up that much.
 With Ryzen we're expected to see a CPU next year with 64 cores 
 and 128 threads at 7nm.
There are 64-bit ARM workstations and server cores if you want that: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12571/gigabyte-thunderxstation-cavium-thunderx2-socs
Don't think it would compare in terms of performance. As even that new fancy ipad pro CPU isn't anywhere near a current-day desktop CPU.
Nov 13 2018
parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 21:10:08 UTC, Rubn wrote:
 On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 17:41:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 11:45:22 UTC, Rubn wrote:
 On Saturday, 10 November 2018 at 07:29:17 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 [...]
Not really that impressive, my desktop i5-2500k from like 8 years ago is still faster than the CPU in last years Macbook pro. Intel has been stagnate with their 14nm processors. Even this years CPUs is still based on the same architecture as their CPU from 2-3 years ago.
No, benchmarks show the mobile i7 in last year's MBP as faster than your old desktop core i5, so the iPad Pro is faster than your desktop. :P Of course, the TDP of your desktop i5 is twice the mobile i7 and almost 10 times the A12X in the new iPad Pro, so Apple completely blows away Intel on the performance-to-power-dissipation ratio.
Which benchmarks did you look at, cause I have mine overclocked past 4 GHz.
The same Geekbench site as in the iPad Pro article usually has the MBP i7 ahead: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=2500k https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=7820hq
 Not faster than my desktop where it counts, at least for me 
 (the gpu). Nothing really needs that much more power for CPU, 
 and single thread performance hasn't gone up that much.

 With Ryzen we're expected to see a CPU next year with 64 
 cores and 128 threads at 7nm.
There are 64-bit ARM workstations and server cores if you want that: https://www.anandtech.com/show/12571/gigabyte-thunderxstation-cavium-thunderx2-socs
Don't think it would compare in terms of performance. As even that new fancy ipad pro CPU isn't anywhere near a current-day desktop CPU.
Did you read the link? That's not an iPad, but a workstation with an AArch64 server CPU, similar to the Ryzen you mentioned.
Nov 13 2018
prev sibling parent reply kinke <noone nowhere.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 17:41:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 No, benchmarks show the mobile i7 in last year's MBP as faster 
 than your old desktop core i5, so the iPad Pro is faster than 
 your desktop. :P Of course, the TDP of your desktop i5 is twice 
 the mobile i7 and almost 10 times the A12X in the new iPad Pro, 
 so Apple completely blows away Intel on the 
 performance-to-power-dissipation ratio.
While the last statement may hold some truth, I sure as hell don't trust Geekbench numbers. And all ARM/x86 comparisons seem to be based on that one little, highly controversial benchmark suite. Their multicore results suggest a Ryzen 1950X outperforms an i7 7700K by only 50%. A small testsuite of 8 real-world apps (incl. raytracing, video encoding, compression) shows a min gain of 80% and max gain of 200%, definitely averaging above 100%: https://www.computerbase.de/2018-08/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx-2950x-test/2/#diagramm-blender-280 As with any benchmark, your milage may vary, but a dedicated multicore score apparently not scaling well at all makes me wonder. Unless someone gives me hard numbers that their phone/tablet can compile something like LLVM/LDC in a time anywhere near their desktop CPU, I don't waste a second believing that a ~5W CPU can match a 65+ W desktop one, even a 5-years old one like mine. Laptops would surely already be shipping with these chips if that was the case.
Nov 13 2018
parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 22:39:34 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 17:41:31 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 No, benchmarks show the mobile i7 in last year's MBP as faster 
 than your old desktop core i5, so the iPad Pro is faster than 
 your desktop. :P Of course, the TDP of your desktop i5 is 
 twice the mobile i7 and almost 10 times the A12X in the new 
 iPad Pro, so Apple completely blows away Intel on the 
 performance-to-power-dissipation ratio.
While the last statement may hold some truth, I sure as hell don't trust Geekbench numbers. And all ARM/x86 comparisons seem to be based on that one little, highly controversial benchmark suite. Their multicore results suggest a Ryzen 1950X outperforms an i7 7700K by only 50%. A small testsuite of 8 real-world apps (incl. raytracing, video encoding, compression) shows a min gain of 80% and max gain of 200%, definitely averaging above 100%: https://www.computerbase.de/2018-08/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx-2950x-test/2/#diagramm-blender-280 As with any benchmark, your milage may vary, but a dedicated multicore score apparently not scaling well at all makes me wonder.
These broad benchmarks are indicative, but the best is obviously to try it out with your own software.
 Unless someone gives me hard numbers that their phone/tablet 
 can compile something like LLVM/LDC in a time anywhere near 
 their desktop CPU, I don't waste a second believing that a ~5W 
 CPU can match a 65+ W desktop one, even a 5-years old one like 
 mine. Laptops would surely already be shipping with these chips 
 if that was the case.
As my first post notes, 64-bit ARM laptops are now shipping and more are on the way: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13498/samsung-unveils-galaxy-book2-12inch-snapdragon-850-with-x20-lte-20-hrs https://wccftech.com/snapdragon-8180-new-details-octacore-soc/
Nov 13 2018
parent reply kinke <kinke libero.it> writes:
On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 23:20:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 As my first post notes, 64-bit ARM laptops are now shipping and 
 more are on the way:

 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13498/samsung-unveils-galaxy-book2-12inch-snapdragon-850-with-x20-lte-20-hrs

 https://wccftech.com/snapdragon-8180-new-details-octacore-soc/
We'll see where that goes, the Windows ARM adventure with x86 emulation had to fail of course. If the power efficiency of ARM was really much better than x86, I wonder why it hasn't exploded in the server market yet, where software compatibility shouldn't play that big a role. Judging by the performance of the AArch64 boxes provided by Shippable/Packet (using -j16 leading to a performance similar to -j3 for an x86 CI service, for the LDC CI suite, but requiring obviously a lot more memory for that throughput), I guess it's not that much better when the x86 chips are tweaked for throughput (server CPUs: lower frequencies, lower voltages, much more cores).
Nov 14 2018
next sibling parent rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 15/11/2018 12:27 AM, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 23:20:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 As my first post notes, 64-bit ARM laptops are now shipping and more 
 are on the way:

 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13498/samsung-unveils-galaxy-book2-12inch-snapdragon-850
with-x20-lte-20-hrs 


 https://wccftech.com/snapdragon-8180-new-details-octacore-soc/
We'll see where that goes, the Windows ARM adventure with x86 emulation had to fail of course. If the power efficiency of ARM was really much better than x86, I wonder why it hasn't exploded in the server market yet, where software compatibility shouldn't play that big a role. Judging by the performance of the AArch64 boxes provided by Shippable/Packet (using -j16 leading to a performance similar to -j3 for an x86 CI service, for the LDC CI suite, but requiring obviously a lot more memory for that throughput), I guess it's not that much better when the x86 chips are tweaked for throughput (server CPUs: lower frequencies, lower voltages, much more cores).
Some are applying ARM for servers. Cloudflare is a great example of this[0]. But they do have to invest quite a bit in R&D to get everything working right. Which may or may not have something to do with it. [0] https://blog.cloudflare.com/neon-is-the-new-black/
Nov 14 2018
prev sibling parent reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 11:27:03 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 23:20:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 As my first post notes, 64-bit ARM laptops are now shipping 
 and more are on the way:

 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13498/samsung-unveils-galaxy-book2-12inch-snapdragon-850-with-x20-lte-20-hrs

 https://wccftech.com/snapdragon-8180-new-details-octacore-soc/
We'll see where that goes, the Windows ARM adventure with x86 emulation had to fail of course.
It works fine, performance is good enough for most.
 If the power efficiency of ARM was really much better than x86, 
 I wonder why it hasn't exploded in the server market yet, where 
 software compatibility shouldn't play that big a role. Judging 
 by the performance of the AArch64 boxes provided by 
 Shippable/Packet (using -j16 leading to a performance similar 
 to -j3 for an x86 CI service, for the LDC CI suite, but 
 requiring obviously a lot more memory for that throughput), I 
 guess it's not that much better when the x86 chips are tweaked 
 for throughput (server CPUs: lower frequencies, lower voltages, 
 much more cores).
Amazon just announced their own custom-designed AArch64 server core for AWS: https://www.servethehome.com/putting-aws-graviton-its-arm-cpu-performance-in-context/ I mentioned the Cloudflare server benchmarks against Intel earlier in this thread, comparable performance with half the electric power dissipation: https://blog.cloudflare.com/arm-takes-wing/ All that said, I don't think cloud will matter that much, as mobile p2p is poised to replace a lot of it.
Dec 01 2018
next sibling parent Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
On Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 09:53:30 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Wednesday, 14 November 2018 at 11:27:03 UTC, kinke wrote:
 On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 at 23:20:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 As my first post notes, 64-bit ARM laptops are now shipping 
 and more are on the way:

 https://www.anandtech.com/show/13498/samsung-unveils-galaxy-book2-12inch-snapdragon-850-with-x20-lte-20-hrs

 https://wccftech.com/snapdragon-8180-new-details-octacore-soc/
We'll see where that goes, the Windows ARM adventure with x86 emulation had to fail of course.
It works fine, performance is good enough for most.
 If the power efficiency of ARM was really much better than 
 x86, I wonder why it hasn't exploded in the server market yet, 
 where software compatibility shouldn't play that big a role. 
 Judging by the performance of the AArch64 boxes provided by 
 Shippable/Packet (using -j16 leading to a performance similar 
 to -j3 for an x86 CI service, for the LDC CI suite, but 
 requiring obviously a lot more memory for that throughput), I 
 guess it's not that much better when the x86 chips are tweaked 
 for throughput (server CPUs: lower frequencies, lower 
 voltages, much more cores).
Amazon just announced their own custom-designed AArch64 server core for AWS: https://www.servethehome.com/putting-aws-graviton-its-arm-cpu-performance-in-context/ I mentioned the Cloudflare server benchmarks against Intel earlier in this thread, comparable performance with half the electric power dissipation: https://blog.cloudflare.com/arm-takes-wing/ All that said, I don't think cloud will matter that much, as mobile p2p is poised to replace a lot of it.
Qualcomm just announced their ARM laptop chip for next year, the Snapdragon 8cx, alongside their latest top-end mobile chip, the 855: https://www.anandtech.com/show/13688/qualcomm-tech-summit-day-3-snapdragon-8cx-the-new-acpc-soc This likely is a tweaked ARM Cortex-A76, which is the first chip design where ARM claims laptop performance: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/06/arm-promises-laptop-level-performance-in-2019/ Qualcomm claims 2X the performance of an unnamed 15W Intel laptop chip when (both are?) running at 7W, and much lower power consumption overall. Not exactly apples-to-apples since they're using the latest 7nm process for their unreleased chip, but interesting claims nonetheless. For software, Windows 10 Enterprise, Firefox, Office 365/Azure, and of course the just-announced Chromium-based Edge will all be optimized for 64-bit ARM. Microsoft released a 64-bit ARM SDK for Windows this year, so you can build native apps. It appears that WinDragon is making a big push for ARM-based laptops over the next year or two. I think ARM will do well, as they have many other OS options, including iOS and the Samsung Android devices with multi-window DeX support. I'm skeptical about Windows surviving this ARM transition because of all the legacy cruft, but let's see.
Dec 07 2018
prev sibling parent reply kinke <kinke gmx.net> writes:
On Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 09:53:30 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 https://blog.cloudflare.com/arm-takes-wing/
Some more interesting server benchmarks (ARM vs. Power9 vs. x86): https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=rome-power9-arm
Aug 21
parent Newbie2019 <newbie2019 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 21 August 2019 at 09:53:27 UTC, kinke wrote:
 Some more interesting server benchmarks (ARM vs. Power9 vs. 
 x86):

 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=rome-power9-arm
The recent ARM product of 2019 is improve for mobile. I get myself a 2019 Android phone with Qualcomm 865, the performance improve is huge compare to 2017 Android phone. (build llvm time take around 1/10 compare my old phone, I feel it will be same speed like Laptap in 1 to 3 years). The Qualcomm 865 is based on ARM Cortex-A76, design release at 5/31/18. I guess the benchmark ARM 16NM server is use at least 2nd generation behind product(there is 14nm, 12nm, 10nm, 7nm ARM product). And ARM is yet not fully commit to server product yet. Theres is so many people use mobile phone every day, and Microsoft will release ARM based Laptop product soon, Apple prepare for ARM based New Macbook for years. The Dlang will not be able to work for the laptop product when they are released. (And Rust/Go already ready for this.)
Aug 21