Edit: Ok, the answer is, both. Thanks ;)
Edit: Ok, the answer is, both. Thanks ;)
2.) For those that don't, libhoudini does an ok job even on slower phones. On faster chromebooks that shouldn't be an issue at all.
1. This depends on closed-source code (libhoudini is Intel code, and it's not open, last I heard). I guess it's not the first piece of closed-source code in Chromebooks, but it's a crucial piece.
2. This code is still not portable, it just runs on 2 archs, unless someone writes a libhoudini for all other archs as well.
Chromebooks run only ARM or x86.
Again, this is an issue that's relevant to a tiny minority of the applications since vast majority do not ship native binaries.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/05/the-play-store-comes-...
Hopefully that means we'll see a lot more ARM-based Chromebooks as well going forward. No need for an Intel monopoly in the architecture agnostic Chrome OS world, so I hope Google and its partners will stop encouraging that monopoly going forward.
Cortex A72/Snapdragon 820 have Core M-level performance. If Core M is good enough for a $400 Chromebook, then those are also good for a $300 touch-enabled Chromebook.
Many x86 Chromebooks offer several tiers that obfuscate the data, but in terms of product line releases, they're about 50/50.
Both Samsung Chromebooks, ASUS Chromebook Flip, HP Chromebook 14 G3, Haier and Hisense's both as well, for example, are ARM devices.
How would this happen?