On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 09:56:05AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Sun, Mar 20, 2005 at 12:00:23PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > > But why would you spend over 1000 pounds on an arm Linux desktop box > > instead of a few hundred pounds on a random i386 desktop box? > Because you don't want a 100+W dissipating screaming monster on your desk ?
You can get low power x86 systems that have much better performance (> 1 GHz). > > A reasonable answer is because you're developing for arm's for embedded > > applications; but if so, what's the big deal with using unstable or > > snapshots, and running your public servers on other boxes? > > Because using unstable is not a workable solution. Try to make a daily > unstable install, and count how many days it is broken on the tier1 arches, > and see how worse it can become on tier2 slower arches. Most work for embedded systems would be cross-compiled from faster systems anyway. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
