flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > the public power about x86 architecture.

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
hello.

many of you already meet some difficulties about assembly programming.
not really depending on your skills, but depending only on the bad designs around x86 architecture.

for example:
MMX registers shared with FPU registers.
this one is the worse implementation ever made on x86 (in my own opinion).

there are many other problems, regarding to the different components inside the PC.

for example, the keyboard scancodes, with extentions instead of complete refund (in the 1980's). the mouse with it's ugly counts in 3 bytes, etc, etc.

of course, we can say: it is up to you to manage this.

but i think it is a big waste of time to play with so much hardware misconceptions.

then, i ask you, do you believe that we (the public) can have a little chance to make this change. a sort of petition, telling the manufacturer the points to change in their designs. and then, have MMX registers independent from the FPU, have the keyboard with a one byte scancode, with all keys ored with 80h when released, have a standard mouse with 4 bytes packet (X,Y,Z,buttons), in brief terms, have a lot of better hardware implementations...

of course, theses changes cannot be made on old computers, but for the next computers, instead of continuing the infinite loop of uglyness, cannot they change it?

but the lambda-users don't care about this kind of stuff, all they want is a PC to connect to MSN, then, no place for a hardware revolution...
Post 26 May 2010, 11:21
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17347
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
It is not about how it functions, or how it works internally. It is about MARKETING. If you have a well funded marketing campaign you can do anything with the hardware and people WILL buy it no matter how crappy it really is.

Any idealistic plans will have to be put aside. Sorry, facts of the world and all that. Sucks I know, but reality has never cared about ideals.
Post 26 May 2010, 11:39
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
roboman



Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 122
Location: USA
roboman
I agree with revolution, except would say that the best marketed tool that actually works is the one that tends to win. For the public, I think the view is "the advertisements are so cool / it's the cool thing to have, does it do what I need to have done". Programming the dam joy sticks was always the worst thing for me, for only a couple of dollars they could have put an analog to digital converter on the game card.
Post 26 May 2010, 18:48
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
guignol



Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 720
guignol
revolution wrote:
It is not about how it functions, or how it works internally. It is about MARKETING. If you have a well funded marketing campaign you can do anything with the hardware and people WILL buy it no matter how crappy it really is.

Any idealistic plans will have to be put aside. Sorry, facts of the world and all that. Sucks I know, but reality has never cared about ideals.
Well, you can always put some caring ideals into reality Smile

After all, isn't "marketing" only a function? Cool
Post 28 May 2010, 08:04
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edemko



Joined: 18 Jul 2009
Posts: 549
edemko
guingol
After all, isn't "marketing" only a function?
...a function written in VB6.0.
actually there are historical motives, idea&request growth, habits, compatibility issues
Post 28 May 2010, 08:28
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
marketing is not a function, it is an os, based on ...... philosophy of money, dow jones, wall street, etc...

like windows, it is the official os of our modern society. and i hope it will not be the os of our future society, like windows Wink.
Post 28 May 2010, 10:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
roboman



Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 122
Location: USA
roboman
given a look at apples i-stuff and the droid devices, I would say the tables are turning a bit
Post 28 May 2010, 16:59
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4240
Location: 2018
edfed
apple istuff and android... hem...you're joking?
it is pure marketing. and worse than marketing is marketing for ignorant people.

buy the new iphone guys, you need it, it is the best!

Laughing

no, apple and google doesn't revert the situation, they only make their buziness, like everybody.
Post 28 May 2010, 18:02
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
zir_blazer



Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 66
zir_blazer
Its everyone wet dream to throw away x86 and start in an entirely new architecture made with the knowledge of all the previous Instruction Set Architecture mistakes of the past. But x86 is an impossible to erradicate pandemy. Even Intel themselves failed with IA64 (Not that it was that good though)...
Post 28 May 2010, 20:28
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger Reply with quote
DustWolf



Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 373
Location: Ljubljana, Slovenia
DustWolf
edfed wrote:
this one is the worse implementation ever made on x86 (in my own opinion).


The thing with IBM PC derivatives which is both it's greatest advantage and it's greatest weakness is that it's an open compromise made between different companies all trying to get their different tech into a single common architecture.

See what is wrong with somebody redesigning this ground-up is Apple. I will never want to use a computer so architecturally closed, the same reason I won't solely use Microsoft products: there is no option to use something different. For example on an Apple you cannot, by definition, choose hardware that is cheap, highly reliable and high performance; you MUST use what they support and nothing else.

And if it is not closed, it gradually (d)evolves into what the modern PC is.

I am not saying it is impossible to do anything better than it is while being open about it, but very simply that why things are so screwed up is closely related to this openness. Remember the IBM PC is essentially a programmable chip connected to undefined peripherals via interface micro-controllers, that's all; now see what happened.

LP,
Jure
Post 07 Jun 2010, 21:48
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.