The Irtysh microprocessor: a Russian chip from China

21 867 249
The Irtysh microprocessor: a Russian chip from China
Source: cnews.ru


Irtysh equals Loongson


Tramplin Electronics received 1,3 billion rubles to create a Russian server processor. It sounds like a breakthrough. But let's put it more simply. What are we actually getting? A chip built on the Chinese LoongArch architecture, with LA664 cores developed by the Chinese company Loongson. The specifications are practically mirror images of their Chinese counterparts. The 16-core Irtysh C616 is Loongson, the 32-core C632 is also Loongson, and the 64-core flagship C664 is again Loongson. The only Russian components are a few security modules, a cryptographic accelerator, and the microchip housing. Essentially, Tramplin Electronics is acting as a licensee and integrator, customizing the Chinese base to suit its needs, rather than creating the architecture from scratch.




Source: telesputnik.ru

Microprocessors have always been a problem in modern Russia. Leaving aside the Soviet period, the first chips appeared immediately after the country's collapse in the early 90s. More precisely, development began on the basis of Soviet technology. Then came the Elbrus, a microchip with a unique architecture that in some respects even outperformed its Western counterparts. Then came new generations, each one becoming more powerful. There were also other projects, such as the Baikal, which used the popular ARM architecture.

There was essentially one problem: all of this was manufactured abroad, primarily in Taiwan. And after 2022, when the West imposed sanctions, this option was closed. The country found itself in a situation where critical systems—banking, energy, government—were running on Intel and AMD processors, and components for them were no longer being supplied. At least, not through official channels.

The development of a domestic microprocessor has become a matter of national security—and nothing less. In parallel with the chip's development, the complex process of creating a Russian photolithograph—or, in simpler terms, a machine for printing microprocessors—is underway. While we're still waiting for the photolithograph, our own microchip is almost ready. The extent to which it's truly Russian is discussed above.

The most interesting thing is that at the end of 2022, Beijing declared Loongson processors strategically important and banned their export. A year later, Russian engineers somehow obtained a license to develop the architecture and launched their own line. How this happened is a closely guarded secret. The terms of the license are not disclosed. But the fact remains: we have replaced dependence on the West with dependence on the East. Is this good or bad? So far, so good. China is a partner. But a partner with its own interests. And in stories There have been examples of technological alliances where friendships ended abruptly and painfully. The Tramplin team are former engineers from the Moscow SPARC Technology Center, the same ones who developed Elbrus.

The investor is Omsk businessman Svyatoslav Kapustin, founder of Tramplin Ventures. He decided to invest in Russian chip production, hoping they would provide a viable alternative to unaffordable Western solutions. And his calculations appear to be correct: laws require import substitution, the lists of chips approved by the Ministry of Industry and Trade and the Ministry of Digital Development are growing, and any Russian chip is guaranteed to find customers in banks, telecoms, energy, and government agencies.

The Irtysh's specs are impressive: 16 to 64 cores, up to 128 threads, up to 2 TB of RAM, and built-in encryption. The chip can handle complex calculations—roughly on par with processors from Intel and AMD. Manufacturers claim their chip performs as well as popular competitors, even though each core is slower individually. But in servers, this isn't important—they prioritize multiple cores working simultaneously, not just one core being as fast as possible.

Tests have shown that a server powered by this chip easily handles large user flows and responds quickly to requests. This is perfectly adequate for banks and large IT systems. If anyone's wondering, the Irtysh isn't a gaming processor—the screen image will be very choppy. But that's not what the chip was designed for.

Technological breakthrough or trap?


The schedule for introducing the Irtysh processor to the masses is tight: an application to the Ministry of Industry and Trade's registry is scheduled for the second quarter of 2026, engineering samples are expected in the second quarter of 2027, market launch is expected in 2027, and the international market launch is expected in 2028. 1,3 billion rubles should be enough for preparatory work and the production of several thousand processors. Converted to dollars, that's about 15 million. For a processor project, that's not much. By comparison, Intel spends about 20 billion dollars annually on development. Therefore, it's safe to say that Russia is getting a very good deal on the Irtysh processor.


The main problem with the Irtysh is its production. The chips will almost certainly be made in China at a SMIC plant; in Russia, they are only assembled into packages, and that's a small part of the work. The most advanced Russian process technology is 65 nanometers, a level that's been around for twenty years. The Irtysh, on the other hand, was created in China using a 12-nanometer process. Russia simply doesn't have the photolithography equipment for the corresponding class. While the crystals are being made in China, Tramplin Electronics only oversees the final assembly. Full localization will require tens of billions of rubles and the development of a domestic process technology to at least 28 nm. This will take years.

Irtysh also has a unique feature: it's not directly compatible with Windows. Enthusiasts tested the chip on The Witcher (which runs on Windows), but this required some clever tricks. Ultimately, the processor will perform worse than advertised on the familiar Russian Windows operating system. The lack of Windows support is Irtysh's main obstacle to mass adoption. For decades, corporate Russia has relied on Windows: accounting databases, document management, specialized software for banks, factories, and hospitals. Migrating all this to the unfamiliar Linux platform is not just difficult, but impossible for many companies.

Without Windows, the processor loses access to a vast universe of programs. Millions of applications—from the familiar 1C and Office to highly specialized engineering suites—were created specifically for this OS. Adapting them to another platform would require colossal expenditures, which no one would bear for the sake of a negligible market. As a result, Irtysh users will find themselves in a closed world with a limited software selection, where half of their vital tasks simply won't have a solution.

But there's another aspect to independence from Windows. Microsoft isn't just an operating system manufacturer; it's a tool of influence. With sanctions changing monthly and major IT companies already blocking licenses for Russian users, relying on third-party software is extremely dangerous. If a processor runs Windows, it can be rendered useless at any time: through an update, through license revocation, or through remote blocking.

This won't happen with Linux and domestic operating systems—the code is open, and decisions are made here, not at headquarters on the other side of the world. For banks, government agencies, and defense companies, this isn't a matter of convenience, but of survival: we control what runs on our servers, and no one can shut it down. Plus, this is a powerful incentive for the Russian IT industry. As long as Windows is available, developers have no incentive to create alternatives—why invest if the market is saturated? But when Windows is unavailable, demand arises. This means that programmers will emerge who will learn to write for other platforms. Companies will emerge that will build their businesses on this.

The Irtysh developers, albeit on a Chinese platform, deserve congratulations on their initiative. One can only hope for a lasting geopolitical balance between Beijing and Moscow and the rapid technological development of their own production base, not just the packaging line for foreign-made crystals.
249 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    5 May 2026 04: 36
    If they start foisting Linux computers on government agencies, the project is stillborn, just for show. The security forces have been switched to Linux, and as a result, no one uses the company's official computers; everyone has brought personal computers from home.
    1. -4
      5 May 2026 04: 52
      If they start foisting Linux computers on government agencies, the project is stillborn.
      Linux is a great operating system for working and surfing the web. If you're only interested in games, then Windows is for you. wink
      1. + 12
        5 May 2026 06: 28
        The hardest part is retraining 100,000,000 people to think, work, search, and communicate differently. Tens of thousands of specialized programs. Even Excel spreadsheets won't migrate smoothly to Linux. Someone will have to shovel it all together. Meanwhile, programmers are fleeing abroad; here, they're cut off from air travel, unable to work, unable to earn a living. They're drafting skinny mathematicians into the army after their first year, and in the army, those without training and never holding a gun are immediately sent to the Kursk or Voronezh regions. The end result will truly be warehouses and stores filled with Linux computers, while people will survive on old Windows-compatible computers.
        1. -11
          5 May 2026 11: 36
          they don't let me work, they don't let me earn money Oh, come on. If a programmer can work in the field of large corporate software, distributed databases, and their processing, they'll be snapped up. Salaries start at 250 rubles. Of course, this requires skills beyond website pages and AI-generated images.
          Frightened game writers, digital designers, and internet app creators fled.
          1. +2
            5 May 2026 15: 15
            I agree. Moreover, professional developers prefer Linux.
          2. 0
            5 May 2026 15: 18
            Someone gave me some negative feedback. Do you know any amazing programmers who can't find a place to work on 200-300 thousand rubles? Take this as a free tip: programmers are sought out by the Big Three mobile operators, Yandex, banks like Sber, VTB, and Tinkoff (those who build integrated service systems they call ecosystems), Gazprom structures, and even the companies that support their software. They hire people off the street for very good money, without any connections. The only downside for some is that they require a lot of work and skills... Surprised?
            And the knowledge needed isn't centuries-old, like mammoth dung, but current technologies. Programmers are a very dynamic profession; you need to constantly learn.
            1. 0
              13 May 2026 14: 47
              You're out of the loop. Go to Habr and read what people in the profession are writing about these vacancies. The number of applicants for each is over 200.
              1. -1
                13 May 2026 15: 39
                You're out of the loop. Go to Habr.
                You might think so, but you're wrong. Giving advice when it's not asked for is pointless.
                I don't need to go to Habr and read about unknown characters with inflated demands and questionable credentials. You can want a lot, but to achieve your desires, you need a foundation.
                At work, there are programmers nearby whose abilities and salaries I can imagine.
                Among my relatives and friends there are also highly paid, top-notch programmers.
                For example, someone knows four foreign languages ​​and has worked for Western companies, Yandex, and integrators. They typically work on a project for two years, complete it, and go on vacation. They earn enough money to take six months off and learn a new technology. They apply for job openings that take new technologies into account. They receive three to four good offers a week, which are discussed for a month. And then they start earning again.
                1. +1
                  13 May 2026 16: 17
                  I'm sorry, but what you've written is complete nonsense! It's clear that someone with extensive experience and knowledge of foreign languages ​​will find work without any problems! But we're talking about developing the domestic industry. Where can we find such people in commercial quantities? And the salary "starting from 250" is just a pittance. Such a person won't accept that kind of salary. Minimum 5000 USD.
                  In short, you contradict yourself in your posts.
                  But the reality is that it is extremely difficult now to study (I'm talking about a normal university, not courses) and find a job as a programmer with a decent salary.
                  1. 0
                    13 May 2026 16: 29
                    Buddy, let's not use "nonsense" and so on, I'm not used to this form of communication.
                    Read through what I've written in several posts. It's easy for a qualified person who's up-to-date with modern knowledge to find a high salary. Young people want everything right away—that's not the way it works. This applies to programmers, milling machine operators, masons, welders, and tailors alike. You need to have above-average skills to earn above-average wages. Don't sit on your butt; learn and improve. If you can't, then I apologize for choosing the wrong profession. Smart people don't work for the money at first, but for the opportunity to learn something new. Yes, it will be difficult, but how could it be otherwise?
                    And four languages—that's school. Yes, studying from morning until night, not sitting with your phone all day, reading and writing all sorts of nonsense. And also learning physics, chemistry, math, history, literature...
        2. -1
          5 May 2026 12: 32
          People are now buying PCs with Pentium 4s for home use. Previously, they would either throw out such old junk or give it away for free. Now they sell it, and the prices have gotten high.
          1. osp
            +7
            5 May 2026 14: 20
            Computers with such processors are still very popular today.
            If Windows XP is installed.
            Metal analyzers, CNC machines, and even ATMs often operate on them.
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 14: 53
              And now there will be even more demand, the hardware is working and there is a lot of it, you can't play games of course
              1. osp
                +3
                6 May 2026 01: 49
                Industrial instrumentation programs, measuring equipment, medical equipment, and much more still work well on 32-bit Windows XP and 7.
                It does not correspond with the modern one.
                And I recently, about 2 years ago, bought a new netbook with Windows XP installed.
                About the size of a book.
                There are probably a number of such new computers in storage.
                Just replace the battery and install a larger memory module.
                About 18-20 years ago, they were actively purchased by various organizations to complete the products they manufactured.
                They could even be attached to ultrasound machines. Or substance analyzers.
                And when the equipment was taken out of production (in the 2010s), these computers remained in warehouses.
                Wheel balancing and diagnostic stands were also equipped with these operating systems and computers.
            2. -3
              5 May 2026 15: 17
              Linux can run on very weak and old hardware, but not on Windows. XP hasn't been supported for a long time.
              1. +1
                5 May 2026 18: 01
                The seven is also not very demanding
                1. -2
                  5 May 2026 19: 48
                  Windows 7 is much more demanding than XP. But Windows 10, and especially Windows 11, are better. It's not a matter of weak hardware, but rather that Windows 10-11 require some modern features (UEFI, etc.) that older hardware lacks.
                  By the way, you can order a very inexpensive and perfectly decent computer directly from China. Why overpay to the hucksters at stores and computer markets?
                  1. osp
                    +3
                    6 May 2026 01: 37
                    I'm typing these lines directly from Windows 7. 32-bit.
                    The laptop is 15 years old.
                    1. -1
                      6 May 2026 09: 02
                      With Linux, it will work for at least another 15 years, assuming it doesn't fall apart from old age. Many modern Windows programs may not work on such hardware. Including domestic software—our developers are the least likely to support outdated hardware and software.
                    2. +1
                      7 May 2026 07: 40
                      The laptop is also 15 years old. I just upgraded from Windows 7 to 10. I upgraded the RAM from 2 to 6 GB. I've replaced the hard drive twice already. I installed a slightly newer one. I replaced the keyboard once, but some of the main keys stopped working. The charging port came loose, so I replaced it last year. The cooling fan needs replacing. The battery barely holds a charge anymore, and only works when plugged in. The worst part is that the graphics card is integrated, and a replacement only works with the motherboard. The price at the time of purchase was 15.000 rubles. Repairs, including buying two chargers, cost about 20,000-25.000 rubles. But this was done in installments, with a difference of six months (chargers) and a year. Windows 10 has a lot of unnecessary programs. The MP4 player doesn't work well, and in most cases it doesn't download MP4 videos right away. It also doesn't play photos in some formats. It's not particularly suitable for gaming. I'm happy enough to drive tanks, but I can't even afford the Armata in the minimum configuration. My laptop will last a while. Upgrading the Roma is kind of possible, but I don't really want to. Otherwise, I have other things to tinker with and fix at home.
                    3. bar
                      +2
                      12 May 2026 09: 41
                      Same thing. Only the Orthodox MAX doesn't work under the seven.
                  2. +1
                    6 May 2026 08: 28
                    Or buy spare parts and assemble them yourself, but after the new law is introduced, brands will no longer be available.
                    1. 0
                      6 May 2026 09: 00
                      What law? And why do you need brands? They're assembled in the same Chinese factories as the "non-brand" ones. Personally, I've been using only laptops for about 10 years now. You can't assemble them at home... I bought my last laptop a year ago.
                      1. 0
                        6 May 2026 12: 23
                        Since May 27th, the import of PCs, laptops, and components has been banned. Read on, now you won't be able to buy a laptop other than a cheap Chinese one.
                      2. +1
                        7 May 2026 07: 55
                        Perhaps. Entire companies have sprung up here assembling computers and laptops in our country from Chinese components. I was surprised to learn that a factory in Orenburg has been producing plastic pipes, some of them since 1989. I have some of those exact same ones at home, used up and keeping them in reserve. These idiots simply write all the names on the products in non-Russian languages—the main problem with advertising these same products. Gefest is also supposedly a well-known brand, but I only discovered it was from Belarus a week ago. And look at all the TV ads before—and there's zero information that gas stoves are from there. That's one reason for choosing foreign products. Even after the ban on product and company names in foreign languages, after the law was passed, our idiots are still patenting names and labels in languages ​​other than Russian. It's incredibly expensive to remake even the VAZ nameplates into Russian. VRT needs separate nameplates and packaging labels just for selling abroad. But everything sold in Russia needs to be labeled and described in Russian. Only then will both our own people respect it and foreigners learn Russian. Otherwise, it's just nonsense—why the hell would I need a product description (like roasted sunflower seeds) in Kazakh, or even Arabic?! That also wastes unnecessary ink when printing the packaging, which also makes the product a fraction of a percent more expensive.
          2. -4
            5 May 2026 15: 16
            Nastia makarova
            Where did you get that from? The market is flooded with both new and slightly used technology. You can buy a very good computer for cheap. No problem.
            1. +2
              5 May 2026 18: 02
              A new one with such a rate is very expensive, you have to go back to the old one or not change it
        3. -8
          5 May 2026 15: 11
          Carib
          Don't talk about things you don't understand. This Hechel of yours has so many alternatives... You don't need programmers to switch from Hechel to LibreOffice or other Office programs... Just switch to a different computer... For most users, there won't be any difference at all—the interface is the same everywhere. And Microsoft's Visual Basic will soon be dead—few people write in it. Moreover, Hechel doesn't even have compatibility between different versions.
          Lock yourself in your old Kyiv hovel and don't stink!
        4. +1
          7 May 2026 16: 11
          Warehouses and stores are filled with Linux computers, and people will survive on old Windows-compatible computers.
          What's with this strange division of computers? Linux and Windows run on the same computers. True, Linux runs better on weaker hardware.
        5. -1
          11 May 2026 21: 33
          Mr. Karib. No one is drafting a single student (unless they've been expelled for inactivity) into the army, either from universities or colleges, and certainly no one is sending conscripts to the North Military District (unless, of course, they sign a contract themselves). There are no military operations in the Voronezh Region; those who live in Russia know this well, but you, sir, somehow don't know all this!
      2. -2
        5 May 2026 08: 54
        Quote: Schneeberg
        Linux is a great operating system for working and surfing the web.

        My experience has shown that Linux is for those who like to write all commands by hand. Trying to create a Windows-like interface on Linux results in the same results. The whole secret of Linux is the absence and/or minimal interface.
        1. +7
          5 May 2026 08: 58
          The whole secret of Linux is the absence and/or minimal interface
          After all, the secret of Linux is security. The interface doesn't matter at all. wink
          1. 0
            5 May 2026 13: 29
            Quote: Schneeberg
            After all, the secret of Linux is security.

            There's no arguing with that. But when Linux came out, no one really cared about security; it was promoted based on its reliability and indestructibility. But once it acquired an interface to attract Windows fans, all those advantages vanished, security aside.
            1. 0
              5 May 2026 14: 58
              qQQQI think the only downside of Linux is that it has no owner. It's like a good child with ten nurses missing an eye. wink
            2. -6
              5 May 2026 15: 23
              Don't talk nonsense! Linux is based on the UNIX architecture, and security is already built into it. The graphical interface is just one of Linux's optional modules and has no impact on security.
              There's a dummy—a newbie who knows nothing—and then there's a lamer—a militant dummy. Which category do you belong to?
              1. -1
                5 May 2026 16: 56
                Quote: futurohunter
                Linux is based on the UNIX architecture, and security was already built into it.

                No one disputes Linux's security; in fact, I think everyone agrees that it's truly much more secure than Windows. Although, perhaps, given the number of users, it simply wasn't taken up. I already wrote that security is left out because it's not a topic of debate. And as soon as Linux acquired a graphical interface like Windows, all the same shortcomings immediately became apparent.
                1. -1
                  5 May 2026 17: 19
                  What are the disadvantages? That Linux is more reliable and stable, and there's more software for it? And that it's much harder to hack? Are those disadvantages? Incidentally, there aren't fewer users. It's just that Linux is used more by IT professionals. And... generally speaking, everyone uses it, even those who don't even know it exists. am
                  1. +2
                    5 May 2026 18: 25
                    Quote: futurohunter
                    It's just that Linux is used more by IT professionals.

                    What I'm getting at is that Linux, with its minimal interface, is not for the mass user.
                    1. -3
                      5 May 2026 19: 40
                      You choose the graphical interface during installation. Furthermore, you have a whole bunch of these graphical interfaces to choose from—KDE, Gnome, and so on—and you can choose as much as you want. In Astra, for example, the interface, if different from Windows, is only for the better.
                      Nobody's forcing you to use the command line. You can use the Terminal, too...
                      1. +3
                        5 May 2026 22: 08
                        Quote: futurohunter
                        Nobody forces you to work in the command line.

                        I tried it. It didn't work. You have to search for a command for every little thing, and each version has its own. I couldn't find a full description (maybe I didn't search hard enough). Overall, I think it's a modern DOS, which I'd forgotten about for 30 years. Windows is quicker to configure, and everything is more or less understandable. It turned out that a bunch of applications don't work in Linux, so I had to install a Windows emulator, and the question is, why bother? The transition, if the motherland orders it, will be painful.
                      2. -2
                        6 May 2026 09: 14
                        Firstly, there are common commands, like ls and so on, that work across all Linux, Unix, FreeBSD, and even Android and iOS builds – yes, they're related systems. Android is Linux. MS-DOS is a very primitive version of UNIX for very simple machines. The MS-DOS command language is a ripped-from-the-UNIX Shell. Linux has no more powerful help system – it includes the man, help, info commands, and the --help switch. Tons of documentation, websites, and books, starting from preschool level. Don't be too humble. There are no problems here. There's just a certain intellectual laziness and unwillingness to figure it out. In the 80s, when everything was just starting out, we could figure out even more complex systems without documentation. Now, Google, Yandex, and neural networks are a godsend!
                        A "ton of applications" for Windows have direct Linux equivalents, and they're just as good, and often even better, so there's no need to worry. Incidentally, you can run Windows applications on Linux, but the opposite is unlikely.
                        The transition for a basic user using Office and the Internet isn't a problem. If you go deeper, you'll need to figure out everything unfamiliar. Incidentally, if you're trying to figure out Windows, it's a vast world that isn't even documented everywhere; people are still finding Easter eggs and holes. Linux, on the other hand, is open, and every period and comma is documented.
                      3. +1
                        6 May 2026 15: 25
                        Quote: futurohunter
                        There is simply a certain intellectual laziness and unwillingness to understand.

                        That too, but most likely there's no real point in switching from Windows. Only if the going gets tough.
                      4. -1
                        6 May 2026 16: 57
                        People always prefer what's familiar. Does it work? - Don't change anything!
                        If you can use your favorite software without any limitations, why change anything? It's a different matter if that same MS becomes unavailable for some reason. For example, it stops working on your computer. Or if your work requires you to switch to domestic software.
                      5. +2
                        6 May 2026 19: 22
                        Quote: futurohunter
                        For example, it might stop working on your computer. Or your work might require you to switch to domestic software.

                        There are no options here, but deep down I will miss Windows with its bunch of bugs.
                      6. -4
                        7 May 2026 00: 39
                        Not necessarily. Linux has the same interface by default. But it could be even better. "If only... mushrooms grew in my nose..." laughing
                2. +3
                  5 May 2026 20: 58
                  Quote: qqqq
                  It's truly much safer than Windows. Although, given the number of users, it's possible they simply haven't bothered with it.

                  That's right. That same "Elusive Joe." wassat
                  1. -3
                    6 May 2026 17: 03
                    Incorrect. Windows is developed solely by Microsoft, which doesn't disclose its code or explain its underlying principles. Linux is developed by a huge number of people. You can too. Everything there has long been known.
                    Windows has another drawback. Essentially, it's a patchwork of older versions, and therefore contains numerous vulnerabilities and flaws. Linux is constantly improving—a huge community of developers around the world is constantly working to improve it.
                    Linux was built with a very powerful security system, while Windows is much less secure. Furthermore, there's Kali Linux, a special version created specifically for hackers and security professionals.
          2. -2
            5 May 2026 15: 21
            Well, not only that. Linux computers run for years without a reboot. Windows starts glitching and slowing down after a couple of years of use. You have to go to great lengths to clean and optimize it.
            1. 0
              5 May 2026 16: 33
              Wow, I've been running Windows for years since at least Windows 7, if not XP, and nothing starts glitching or slowing down. And I don't even have to reboot.
              1. -3
                5 May 2026 16: 52
                Yeah, but XP had to be regularly uninstalled and reinstalled. Windows 4 had the same problem, but uninstalling and reinstalling isn't as easy. Version 11 has been around for four years now. Rebooting Windows after at least six months of intensive use is commonplace. Moreover, it can reboot itself if it deems it necessary. For example, for an update.
                1. 0
                  5 May 2026 16: 58
                  No comments Yes "" "" "
        2. -3
          5 May 2026 15: 19
          qQQQ
          Apparently, you have no experience whatsoever. In Windows, you only have one GUI, the one from Microsoft, whereas in Linux, you can choose from a ton of options. Some interfaces are the same as Windows, and some are much better. And the commands are for real professionals. You can do a lot faster and easier than with a GUI.
      3. -1
        5 May 2026 15: 05
        I agree! Linux is much better for work. And for games, Windows is. But you can live without games... Most people live and don't suffer.
        1. +2
          5 May 2026 15: 10
          But you can live without toys... Most people live and don't suffer.
          That's how I am! wink
      4. +1
        5 May 2026 16: 29
        What exactly is a "great" build for the job?
      5. -1
        5 May 2026 18: 36
        Linux is a great operating system for working and surfing the web. If you're only interested in games, then Windows is for you.

        Installing a virtual machine with Windows
        1. -2
          6 May 2026 17: 18
          Quote: Sensor

          Installing a virtual machine with Windows

          Why bother? What do you miss about Linux that you're willing to give up half the speed? 90% of software is now cross-platform or has alternatives. You can't play games in a virtual machine; that's what Port Proton is for.
      6. +1
        6 May 2026 20: 36
        Tell me, are there CAD systems and postprocessors for CNC machines that run on Linux? Like Aspire, Lightburn, ARTCAM. Is AutoCAD Linux-compatible?
        1. 0
          10 May 2026 21: 27
          Compass 3D is compatible. A native version was recently released.
          1. +1
            10 May 2026 21: 38
            Retraining is a bit of a hassle. But that's okay. What about postprocessors? You can, in a pinch, design a product in Corel-like programs. Although it's technically challenging... tedious... in short, a hassle.
            But how can we distill g-cod later?
            By the way, some machines don't even understand AutoCAD from the 90s or some other really exotic programs. They're as old as elephant feces. But replacing them is a piece of cake.
            1. +1
              11 May 2026 13: 26
              In fact, these are isolated cases that shouldn't slow down the entire industry. Machines will be replaced sooner or later, and if you cling to the old stuff and don't upgrade to the new, you'll eventually find yourself penniless. Even Compass can easily generate a drawing in AutoCAD format, but you can process it with a program that's "very old, designed for NT 4.0, and has no equivalent."
              1. +2
                12 May 2026 07: 30
                You're not quite clear. It's not about which program to use to draw the drawing. The whole issue is with postprocessors/compilers. What will translate this drawing into machine code? You can't write them, since we don't manufacture such machines. It's all imported. Will THEY understand what Compass offers them? And will they run Linux themselves?
      7. 0
        6 May 2026 20: 48
        I don't understand why there's a downvote. I've been using Linux at home since 1998. I don't regret a thing.
      8. +1
        6 May 2026 23: 57
        Judging by your enthusiasm—games and surfing—it's your thing. Ask the security forces what Word-like programs they have on Linux and how enjoyable they are to use.
    2. +9
      5 May 2026 05: 45
      They use it, they have to use it, all protected computers are on Linux, through a mat, but they have to work.
      1. -4
        5 May 2026 15: 25
        Another lamer... Everything's fine with this Linux. It's for smart people, not for playing Solitaire when the boss isn't looking.
        1. +5
          5 May 2026 16: 36
          Yeah, like when all the documents were originally created in Office, and then you can't open them properly in any Liberian programs and have to reprint everything, etc. U - "Convenience".
          1. -4
            5 May 2026 16: 48
            Save in ODF or other open formats, and you'll be fine. If the document is clean, everything will open.
            1. +3
              5 May 2026 16: 52
              Thank you, Cap! But something is still crooked and askew.
              1. -2
                5 May 2026 16: 54
                I don't see your problem, so I can't say anything. But I've dug deep into Microsoft over the years, and even had to pass certifications. Sometimes I couldn't even swear. It's much easier with Linux. By the way, there's not only Libra, but also a bunch of other Linux-based offices.
                1. DO
                  +1
                  5 May 2026 18: 28
                  futurohunter, complex MS Office documents (with tables, headers, footers, and some fonts, especially Visio vector images) don't open properly in Libre. And vice versa.
                  However, in many Russian state-owned enterprises, for several years now, only Libra has been administratively permitted, and the aforementioned problem disappears on its own.
                  Older versions of Libra had some glitches (especially with long documents and when converting document formats). But in the latest version of Libra 26.2.3, I personally haven't seen these old issues.
                  1. -3
                    5 May 2026 19: 37
                    I'll be honest, I personally don't have any need for Linux or its Office suites right now (except for familiarization and learning). But I've used them, and unless there were any issues (like built-in vector graphics, SmartArt, etc.), everything worked fine. Now I have MyOffice and P7—both are included in the Russian software registry, and everything seems compatible.
                    Believe me, I struggled with MS Office just as much. No Office is perfect.
                    1. DO
                      -1
                      5 May 2026 20: 44
                      futurohunter, I personally haven't noticed any glitches in MS Office 10 + Visio 10 and higher. Among consumer products, this is the most advanced office suite.
                      However, when working on Linux, I don't see the point in running a virtual machine or the glitchy Wine for the sake of Windows MS Office, let alone rebooting to a Windows drive. Libra is available out of the box or in repos on all Russian Linux systems. Installing the latest version of Libra from the official website is also no problem. Compared to MyOffice and R7, Libra is more advanced, which is why I use it.
                      1. -3
                        6 May 2026 09: 27
                        You're wrong. The latest version of MS Office is 2024. It has plenty of glitches. For example, not all documents from older versions open correctly, especially PowerPoint. When you need to retrieve something from archives, you often have to resort to a bit of fiddling around. New tools don't always work correctly. Sometimes they don't work at all. Calculation errors in Excel occasionally pop up. In short, if you're more than a basic user, there are plenty of problems and fiddling around. At the level of a computer technician, yes, everything works.
                        As for what to run, there's an established ecosystem. On a Windows computer, it's MS Office; on Linux, it's Libre Office. However, there are also K-Office, Star Office, and Open Office. And even Google Docs. Although they aren't compatible with MS at the advanced level, neither is compatible with any other Office suite at the advanced level. There's no standard, just basic and familiar usability.
                      2. DO
                        +1
                        6 May 2026 16: 14
                        futurohunter, I've only tried MS Office 10 and 13. Version 13 is identical to 10, plus it contains new features I personally don't need. So, if I occasionally use MS Office, it's 10. I haven't tried 2024 and don't plan to.
                        Lately, Libra-26 has been quite satisfactory for me, I have almost forgotten about MS Office.
                      3. -1
                        6 May 2026 16: 53
                        Your versions are already very old. In terms of basic functionality, I agree, they're pretty much the same. But a lot has changed. For example, the interface has gotten a little better in places, and it's more stable. New features have been added, too, but I can't say what they are—I've seen too many versions. I'm using versions 22 and 21. I might upgrade to 24.
                        As for the fact that Libra is a good replacement for Microsoft, you only confirm my arguments.
        2. +1
          7 May 2026 00: 14
          I'll let you in on a secret: 99% of the population isn't even close to being an expert in Linux or its software. And some random police officer who types out dozens of responses to complaints a day, plus countless reports, explanations, and so on, simply doesn't have the time to relearn Word or run after a dimwitted communications specialist (system administrator) to program a new mouse into a tarred computer.
          1. 0
            7 May 2026 00: 20
            And he doesn't need to relearn. He won't even notice the difference, except that there will be folders instead of drives C:, D:, and so on.
      2. +3
        5 May 2026 23: 47
        They removed all the Windows system units and installed new "domestic" Linux ones. No one trained anyone, the system administrators were in shock and panic, because they just installed whatever they were given. They barely got all this junk up and running. But opening a Word document takes about 20 seconds. And what if you have to open whole bunches of them? And if it's inside a table or something, the document hangs for a minute. And instead of working, you get a complete mess. This whole thing was done by a programmer who had never seen anything better than DOS, with its ancient, clumsy, and not always logical interface.
    3. +3
      5 May 2026 09: 19
      If they start foisting Linux computers on government agencies, the project will be stillborn, just for show.

      Well, it's okay with government agencies; they don't do anything more complicated than signs and text anyway. You can really tinker with it.
      The problem is that Linux repositories, to put it simply, are closed to us on both sides. Updates, drivers, and anything important—you can't just shove them into your version of Linux.
      Accordingly, for all sorts of government agencies, local X-factors are sufficient, but for development and enterprises, it’s a dead end.
      The state machine, having gone off the rails, indiscriminately cuts down everything possible, thinking that they will not collapse.
      But no.
      If we need any development in science, industry, IT, or complex intelligent systems, then the path of restrictions the state has chosen is a path to the abyss. And we're happily and cheerfully running there.
      1. -2
        5 May 2026 10: 26
        If there's a will, there's anything you can do, even your own OS! And there's no task impossible!
        1. +2
          5 May 2026 11: 25
          Of course, it's possible. But in our modern age, we want it to be convenient and enjoyable to use.
      2. -6
        5 May 2026 15: 26
        Arnok
        There are a lot of lamers popping up. Linux is free software. What could possibly be done to it?
        1. +6
          5 May 2026 16: 25
          Linux is free software. What could possibly be done to it?

          Access to repositories, I wrote about that there. For a locally running workstation, as I and several other speakers have written, it's not that important. But if you need to develop something and integrate it into different systems, these restrictions are very restrictive. VPN bans, upcoming fees for international traffic... Just read about how 1C and Kaspersky tried to reach an agreement to leave at least some loopholes for their developers to access. I don't know how it ended yet.
          1. -4
            5 May 2026 17: 28
            It's not about repositories. They're closing infrastructure platforms and tools, and not just for Linux, but for Windows as well. All these containerizers, Docker, Hiroko, Git, and so on. Domestic equivalents aren't always functionally equivalent, and they're much more expensive. Yes, and a lot is tied to foreign infrastructure—that's the problem. Aeroflot was hacked through it, and not just Aeroflot. But, again, this is a common problem. And, by the way, far more tools and infrastructure for Microsoft are closed. Linux is in a better position because it's open source, and there's more open source software for it. Windows, on the other hand, is proprietary, and the software for it is mostly proprietary.
        2. +2
          5 May 2026 16: 37
          Your crown has fallen, pick it up, or someone will steal it.
          1. -1
            5 May 2026 16: 46
            Who are you talking to? Who are you talking to?
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 16: 49
              Judging by what's written, it's at least not for a lamer. From a lamer.
      3. DO
        -2
        7 May 2026 12: 36
        Quote: Arnok
        The state machine, having gone off the rails, indiscriminately cuts down all possible

        However, the initiative to sanction Microsoft's withdrawal from Russia does not belong to the Russian state machine, but to the American state machine, which has gone off the rails.
        So what's left for the Russian government to do under these circumstances? Correct, to develop Linux in Russia by every possible means. Which it's doing, in fact, quite successfully.
    4. +6
      5 May 2026 11: 26
      There is something to clarify.
      Firstly, security forces don't buy computers. They acquire information processing and transmission systems for specific tasks. They acquire automated control systems, including server farms (data centers) and automated workstations (AWPs).
      Secondly, application software is created for the tasks that “runs” in this automated control system.
      Thirdly, the customer (for example, the Ministry of Defense) defines the requirements for operating systems and the systems themselves that form the basis of the automated control system.
      Fourth, all software, both system and application, is safety certified (for example, by the Federal Security Service). Incidentally, there's also a certified Win.
      Fifth, you won't be able to use the workstations for anything other than their intended purpose. The mouse can't be changed without following certain protocols. The workstation's serial numbers are stored in a secret room in the library.
      Sixth, there's nothing stopping you from going to a special department and getting a computer to work with Windows and a set of certified application software.
      That's why, to do things that aren't supposed to be done at work, they bring their own computers. And then claim the data is leaking to the enemy.
      1. -6
        5 May 2026 15: 28
        balabol
        My friend and colleague, why argue with obvious losers and provocateurs who spout nonsense and haven't even seen pictures of Linux? Let them rage in their Kyiv hovels.
        1. 0
          5 May 2026 16: 06
          But they wrote to you above that you won't be able to play solitaire, or didn't you understand what you meant?
          1. -1
            5 May 2026 16: 45
            I didn't drink with you on first-name terms, so I wouldn't be on familiar terms. And you can be rude to your mirror, I give you permission. am
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 16: 52
              Another lamer out there? Is that what you meant?
              1. -3
                5 May 2026 16: 55
                Are you talking to yourself? Keep going if it feels good.
        2. 0
          5 May 2026 16: 55
          Well, yeah, sometimes I just lose it and blame myself for such an outburst. I have four operating systems running on different devices at home: Windows, Linux (I don't remember which version), something on my MacBook, and Android on my tablet.
          For the average user, it makes no difference. Files can be converted easily, and the best way to work is on cloud services and, if necessary, file sharing. The only problem is that a hacked Photoshop on Windows works on a workstation, but otherwise, all the workstations are remote service terminals.
          Professional developers generally work in their own software environment.
          It's clear that you need to have a little understanding of everything, otherwise you might end up breaking everything if you're foolish. But that's the same with any undertaking—a thoughtful approach is essential.
          1. -1
            5 May 2026 17: 01
            MacBooks typically run MacOS and Windows. Incidentally, Photoshop was originally designed for Macs, and it's better on Macs. Terminals are an option, but it's like driving a dump truck on sidewalks. All the power of the hardware is lost when the computer becomes a mere appendage to a remote machine.
            Professionals have a wide selection: VS Code, MIDEA, IntelliJ, Atom, and a whole bunch more. There are versions for Mac, Windows, and Linux. Incidentally, Linux is the hardest to break of all the operating systems. If it installs correctly and isn't broken during installation, it's hard to break. Windows is much easier.
            Meaningfulness, and also knowledge, are definitely needed.
            1. -1
              5 May 2026 18: 09
              Well, I agree, I actually wanted to emphasize that as a user I have tried all of these operating systems.
              1. -1
                5 May 2026 19: 45
                By and large, modern Linux builds, macOS, and Windows all have roughly the same interface. Mobile OSes like Android or Apple OS, however, are abysmal. Windows is only the most popular because of Microsoft's aggressive sales policy, which has forced it onto the world. Windows has its fair share of downsides, too. Incidentally, so does macOS. Linux has its downsides, too—there are many different builds, not always compatible with each other, and for deep administration and fine-tuning, you need to at least understand it. But, by and large, for most inexperienced users, there's no difference, except that Linux is the hardest to catch any malware.
                1. 0
                  5 May 2026 21: 03
                  I'll add that Linux isn't particularly demanding on hardware. It can be installed on hardware that won't run modern versions of Windows. Again, I agree that Linux isn't easy to manage, but it rarely crashes.
                  1. 0
                    6 May 2026 09: 18
                    I ran the minimal versions from a CD and even a flash drive on an old computer. Both had a graphical interface and full functionality. And for those moaning and groaning, I suggest you unclench your hand and take a look at your favorite rectangular game—it runs Linux.
                    Regarding "not easy," it's not so clear-cut. Setting up Linux simply requires an understanding of how the system works. But fine-tuning Windows also requires some digging and figuring it out! Moreover, there's much more documentation and literature on Linux. Moreover, all the necessary information is available in the Linux help system, while for Windows you'll have to search elsewhere.
                    1. +1
                      6 May 2026 17: 59
                      The software is basically clear. A more general conclusion about the discussion of the article as a whole: Most of the comments are written by incompetent people. Moreover, the less knowledgeable they are about the subject, the more categorical their statements and the more threatening their tone. Arguing and educating are not worth it, as it takes time; you won't earn gratitude, pleasure, or money. Especially in the news section of the site. The historical section is dominated by more knowledgeable people who are inclined to respectful discussion. Not all of them, but a higher proportion.
                      And, by the way, under no circumstances should you discuss professional matters, as the grief will be immeasurable. Complete laymen will rush into the argument.
                      1. 0
                        7 May 2026 00: 40
                        I completely agree with you)) Moreover, the most ardent debaters have never even laid eyes on the object of their denial))
                      2. +1
                        8 May 2026 00: 00
                        The world used to be ruled by the smart. It was cruel. The smart forced the dumb to study. It was hard for the dumb.
                        Now the world is run by the stupid. It's fair, because there are many more stupid people.
                        Now the smart learn to speak so that the stupid can understand.
                        If a dumb person does not understand something, this is a smart problem.
                        Before, it was the stupid who suffered. Now it's the smart who suffer. There's less suffering because there are fewer and fewer smart people.

                        Mikhail Zhvanetsky
                      3. -1
                        8 May 2026 08: 27
                        I disagree. The world is run by the smart ones, who want to be seen as smart and the rest as dumb. It's easier to control the dumb—the people eat it up. And the smart ones at the top are doing everything they can to destroy the smart ones they've noticed at the bottom.
                      4. 0
                        8 May 2026 11: 04
                        It's a joke, a mental exercise, an attempt to re-arrange events, connect them differently, turn them inside out, and see what happens. A useful practice for an inquisitive mind.
                      5. -1
                        8 May 2026 16: 11
                        ...Ah, verbal, subtle, ringing tricks!
                        I'll peck you, kick you, and bite my elbow.
                        He who doesn't understand is ignorant. To the unclean! If you mow, bite it.
                        I despise crowds. Shall I pee? I'll pee, I'll pee...

                        An excerpt from Sasha Cherny's poem "Stylized Donkey"
                        No offense or personal attacks laughing
                      6. -1
                        8 May 2026 17: 40
                        Well, that was a nice chat; it was all about technical nonsense. Now we've gotten to the serious stuff: the poets of the Silver Age.
                      7. 0
                        9 May 2026 14: 34
                        A genius is a genius in everything)) By the way, they say that "techies" are much better at "lyrics" than "humanities people" are at "physics")) Isn't that right? laughing Happy holiday of our Great Victory!
                      8. 0
                        9 May 2026 15: 23
                        Happy Victory Day, congratulations!
                        I'm an engineer by profession, but I've always envied the way my philologist friends' brains work. If they'd had the will, they could have become excellent technical specialists. But I never quite reached their level of understanding of literature.
                      9. -1
                        9 May 2026 17: 16
                        Linguistics is an exact science)) There is even linguistics of programming languages ​​- a completely engineering discipline.
                        "Lyricists" are all sorts of historians, writers, and other "artists." You can "grow" to any understanding if you do something. In any case, it's easier for an engineer to do this than for a humanities major. An engineer's brain is very clearly organized.
                      10. 0
                        9 May 2026 17: 25
                        The Faculty of Philology has a department and specialty in mathematical linguistics—analyzing language development using statistical methods. And the simultaneous interpreters are incredibly smart—they're top-notch.
                        An engineer's brain is very clearly organized. it's only at Engineer, the craftsman has the same technology as people.
      2. +1
        5 May 2026 16: 40
        "You can't change the mouse without following certain protocols."
        Honestly, honestly?
        1. 0
          5 May 2026 17: 06
          Honestly, honestly. The numbered mouse from the ARMA is exchanged for a mouse that has passed the Special Test (do you know what that is?) and Special Research within the ARMA. Therefore, the only replacement mouse that can be used is one that has passed the same tests and has been officially registered as part of the ARMA in the secret room.
          You might ask if everyone does this, and I'll answer: no, there are some fearless ones. But they can pay dearly. It all depends on the information classification in the system. We're not talking about clerks in a children's toy store, after all.
          1. +5
            5 May 2026 17: 20
            What you're describing is usually kept in a separate room behind a metal door, accessible only to a limited number of people. For everyone else, those who use "everyday" devices, and who are the majority, a new printer, for example, arrives, if you're lucky, unbox it, plug it in, and start working without any protocols—assuming, of course, that the rebuilt Astra (and for everyone like, say, the MO, it's a "nice" bonus) has the printer drivers from that manufacturer, and they work correctly.
            "Special inspection"? I know of a case where a product was sent in a box with seals, and it arrived in the same box with the same seals, but with a certificate. Yes laughing
            1. -1
              5 May 2026 18: 07
              "Special check"? I know of a case where they gave it to me in a box with seals. - Your fault. For such issues, inspectors lose their licenses in five minutes.
              Although maybe that's not what you mean.
              I won't reveal the secret - you can read about it in the open press.
              Using the example of a computer—a SP—this computer is disassembled into modules (screws are loosened, sometimes soldered joints are unsoldered) and X-rayed element by element. The images are archived, the unique component numbers are matched to the images, and the images are sent to a special library. Subsequently, copies of the images are included in the equipment documentation for the facility. Therefore, neither a screw nor a mouse can be simply replaced; it must be recorded in the documentation.
              There's also Special Research—every fully assembled automated workstation with its peripheral devices is tested for radiation in working order in the presence of the Military Representative. This is recorded and signed in the documentation.
              It is clear that the cost of equipment increases several times, not by a percentage, but by several times.
      3. 0
        7 May 2026 00: 06
        A lot of buzzwords on a topic where a couple of sentences would have sufficed. No one in the security forces will give you anything, configure it, or change it—they'll just keep using what they gave them, even if it doesn't work at all. At the Ministry of Internal Affairs, for example, no one can access the databases from a regular computer, and tons of writing (which is 99% of most people's work) can't be done on clunky, uncalibrated software.
        1. -1
          7 May 2026 10: 08
          Lots of smart words on a topic where a couple of sentences would have been enough - Who are you answering to?
    5. -4
      5 May 2026 15: 04
      Linux has everything a security official needs. There's no point in wasting time on nonsense. I personally know a whole bunch of Linux users who "live" on Linux and don't need Windows. Linux has it all.
      1. +2
        6 May 2026 23: 44
        What do you "personally know," my dear? Have you ever seen the Ministry of Internal Affairs' Linux computers? Those are the ones that don't accept flash drives or even mice, and that don't have any decent programs like Word. Some people might get the hang of it, but EVERYONE can't handle it—they either quit or buy their own computers.
        1. 0
          7 May 2026 00: 23
          As far as I understand, the Ministry of Internal Affairs computers are supposed to have domestic Astra Linux. It has Libre Office, which is a pretty good Microsoft Office alternative. As for what you're using, I don't know. But Linux isn't to blame for that, it's the clumsy hands of those who installed it and configured it poorly.
          1. -1
            7 May 2026 08: 39
            I have no idea what they have there now. Their computers are out of sync—you can't install or connect anything you want. I just happened to talk to a few people who quit the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and they all had the same story: a personal computer, a personal MFP, because the entire department shares one, and using it is just a pain. And yes, there are no competent system administrators in government agencies—no one would go there for those salaries.
            1. -2
              7 May 2026 09: 55
              What are you judging if you haven't seen it with your own eyes? It's like the old joke: "Oh, this Chaliapin of yours is disgusting!" - "And what makes you think that?" - "Rabinovich sang it to me yesterday!"
              If people quit the Ministry of Internal Affairs, it's not because they're "computers." Regarding salaries, it varies widely. It all depends on the specific department. Some even drive nice cars. And, by the way, if these "quitters" don't have any "sins," they usually find good jobs and certainly don't complain about their salaries... The workforce in security services and various "law enforcement agencies" is only growing...
              And most importantly, what's Linux's fault? There were people picking on it! It's important to separate the wheat from the chaff!
              1. +1
                8 May 2026 18: 15
                So you need to chew everything point by point, but you still write “I don’t believe it, it’s not true”?
                A young employee gets a job in the investigation department and on the second day, with his head down, goes to buy a laptop and a printer—because he can't do without them (there's tons of paperwork), and the entire investigation department has one Linux computer, which, what's more, no one touches. And yes, people quit for a whole host of reasons, and this, while not the main one, is one of them.
      2. +3
        8 May 2026 18: 24
        Go to the departments and tell the security forces that they have everything. We don't have enough individuals shouting from every corner that the front has everything.
    6. 0
      6 May 2026 07: 52
      It's not all that bleak. I can't speak for others, but 95 percent of the National Guard is already on Linux.
    7. +1
      6 May 2026 11: 30
      Don't talk nonsense. Most of the government software has been migrated from Windows, and it will be migrated soon. And everything works fine, especially since most of it is just office suites, which are no worse than Windows for 99% of users on Linux.
      1. 0
        6 May 2026 23: 48
        I'll answer all you smartasses one by one: when people have NO CHOICE, they slog away on Linux. But when they have a choice, they drag their personal computers out of the house and work on them. I'm not saying this on my own terms, but rather how things are in reality.
        1. -4
          7 May 2026 09: 57
          Once again, you're talking about something you've never seen. For most users, Linux or Windows makes no difference.
          And to avoid "answering the smart guys," I advise you to "become a smart guy" yourself. Believe me, it will come in handy in life. I'm no longer interested in answering you - "Baba Yaga is always against it."
          1. +2
            8 May 2026 18: 21
            So you answered yourself - "Baba Yaga is always against it," although I have never seen these calibrated computers with my own eyes, nor have I heard any user reviews of what is installed on them, but I am definitely against it.
            And yes, everyone should be an expert in their field - in inquiry, in investigation, in civil service, etc. However, none of them are required to be a programmer, just as a programmer is not required to be a brilliant lawyer in criminal, civil, or administrative law, in the land code, or consumer rights.
    8. +1
      6 May 2026 13: 18
      Then came the Elbrus, a microchip with a unique architecture that in some respects even outperformed its Western counterparts. New generations followed, each one becoming more powerful. There were also other projects, such as the Baikal, which used the popular ARM architecture.

      Read about how Elbrus was created (where it came from and which specialists made it), where it was made, the difficulty with which it was introduced into government agencies, and how loans were given for the production of Elbrus itself.
    9. +1
      6 May 2026 17: 10
      Quote: olegff68
      If they start foisting Linux computers on government agencies, the project is stillborn, just for show. The security forces have been switched to Linux, and as a result, no one uses the company's official computers; everyone has brought personal computers from home.

      Where did you get this nonsense? Most government agencies are already on Linux. You go to the MFC—Linux, the pension fund—Linux, social security—Lunux. Have you even heard of information security? Processing classified paperwork on a computer brought from home... What nonsense! To process state secrets, you need a certified computer and a certified operating system. And that's not Windows.
      1. +1
        6 May 2026 23: 53
        Another one... I've not only heard about it, but I've had the privilege of having access and working on a calibrated computer—so-so, to put it mildly. And if you bother to visit YOUR local police officer (investigator/investigator/etc.), ask what computer they use to print out tons of papers a day. Entering data into databases—that's true, but only on calibrated ones.
  2. +9
    5 May 2026 07: 13
    Russia has gone from one addiction to another. And what will happen in the future if problems arise with China? Common interests and alliances are not eternal. Perhaps, instead of processors, they could share equipment, as allies. request
    1. SAG
      +6
      5 May 2026 07: 45
      Maybe instead of processors, they could share equipment, like allies.

      Let's say they sell us a Chinese photolithograph. It's a rare item and therefore expensive. When something breaks, will we have to stop production and wait for Chinese specialists?! And then we have to train people to operate the machine, again in China. Everything costs through the roof. And the gap won't go away. A clear example is India, where a decent product is made only from imported machine kits. And the price of the finished product is twice as high as similar products.
      1. SAG
        0
        5 May 2026 07: 47
        In parallel with the chip's development, the complex process of creating a Russian photolithograph—or, in simpler terms, a machine for printing microprocessors—is underway. We're still waiting for the photolithograph, but our own microchip is almost ready. The extent to which it's truly Russian is noted above.

        It's as clear as day. If we don't have the equipment, where are we supposed to get silicon wafers with ready-made photolithography?! Should we give birth?!
      2. -1
        5 May 2026 08: 55
        "Well, let's say they sell us a Chinese photolithograph. It's a rare item, and therefore expensive." Expensive, that's true. But I don't think it'll be more expensive than the money they've already invested in our developments, with uncertain results. And they'll invest more, with the same results. There's no accountability for the end result, only the money being embezzled by "effective managers."
        1. +2
          5 May 2026 11: 14
          Quote: papas-57
          My dear, that's true. But I don't think it's worth more than the money we've already invested in our developments, with uncertain results.

          You are either unaware or exaggerating.
          - Firstly, if you buy everything, you will never make your own, and therefore, in parallel with shopping, you need to make your own, which is what we try to do, even if it is a bit late.
          Secondly, the manufacturing process technology used for microchips worldwide varies widely, from 350 nm (and even higher) to 2-4 nm, which is primarily used for processors and accounts for the smallest percentage of total microchip production worldwide. Yes, 2-4 nm is the most advanced, but also the most unattainable and expensive, affordable only by countries (primarily Anglo-Saxons) that sponsor (with huge global investments) the developments of the Dutch ASML, which is why their machines are purchased. The leading chip-producing countries themselves are incapable of making such complex machines and therefore depend on ASML (the Netherlands), with the exception of Nikon, Cenon, and a few other companies that can make something themselves, but not using the latest technology. Even China can't make anything advanced, and their sales are also being cut, much less ours (we're in the wrong club or lush garden).
          - Thirdly. You are probably aware that we have already created a 350 nm machine in cooperation with the Belarusians, which little will cover some of the needs for mature technology and chip production for industry (tiny import substitution with modest results, but my own). By 2026, we plan to master a machine using a 130 nm process technology, which represents further advancement in the development of finer technologies. Meanwhile, some equipment may already be suitable for 90 and 65 nm processes. At the same time, chemistry and other related fields are also being developed. And note that we are trying to do this as a counterbalance to global cooperation, from which we have been cut off, as with aviation.
          Fourth, 2-4 nm and even 6-12 nm are a ploy by "effective managers." In reality, the minimum possible size for a transistor, for example, is 18 nm or higher, as it can be difficult to maintain stable performance. But if you make multilayer chips, you can stack several layers on the same surface, which can be interpreted as a reduction in the density of the elements, so the process technology becomes thinner relative to the total number of elements.
          - Fifthly. Again, about us and our plans (which are quite realistic and adequate given the current situation), the goal of which is to reach 28 nm (this is the minimum that will protect us from total backwardness in microelectronics), since even with this technology, quite normal processors are obtained, both in terms of speed and feasibility, without cooperation with world leaders, but own and independentMoreover, we can't compete with the entire world. There are only 150 million of us, and the rest of the world is billions, and their talent, brainpower, and, most importantly, finances are simply not our equal (it's a world away). Therefore, no single country (Russia, for example) can be ahead of the rest of the world, yet some accuse us of lagging behind in everything.
          Here's a brief explanation of the realities of the world and Russia within it. There's much we still don't know or understand, but this is enough to understand the level of our developments and why they are like this. Those who don't understand this will naturally criticize and criticize (they're ignorant and out of touch with reality).
          1. -1
            5 May 2026 11: 52
            Quote: Irokez
            Here is a short explanation for you about the realities of the world and Russia in this world.

            Excellently written. And when you read the local commentators, you might as well lie down and die.
            1. -2
              5 May 2026 12: 09
              [quote=When you read the local commentators, you might as well lie down and die.[/quote]
              There are no longer local commentators here, but from the neighboring side, but there are also those that they use in the dark (those who do not understand the current situation) generally) and these locals are already turning out to be oppositionists or provocateurs.
              And the fact that you want to lie down and die is because you're being emotionally pressed and suppressed, so that your hands drop and the thought comes, "Everything is lost," and you give up. You just have to hold on, even if it seemsthat everything is lost.
              1. -1
                5 May 2026 15: 24
                There are many simply incompetent characters who are psychologically tied to "denial." They don't rise above others by developing, but remain alone, belittling those around them. They are all traitors, fools, and so on down the list. I alone am great, I understand everything, and I see two meters below the surface.
          2. 0
            5 May 2026 12: 13
            Whatever the gimmicks, Intel suffered greatly when it got bogged down in its 14+++ nm process at the turn of the decade. It's only now beginning to emerge from its rut. It doesn't matter what TSMC called its process technology, but it really is better. There's no need to exaggerate in this case. Russia is truly in dire straits when it comes to advanced manufacturing.
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 12: 34
              Quote: VENOM
              There's no need to exaggerate in this case. Russia is truly in dire straits when it comes to advanced manufacturing.

              And no one is saying we're ahead of the curve or even supporting the leaders. We must consider, for example, that after the collapse of the USSR, all our achievements and further development were deliberately destroyed by the victors of perestroika (the Anglo-Saxons). Even though, after the collapse, their economies, profiting heavily from the ruins of the USSR, developed, along with scientific advances and technologies in all fields, we, meanwhile, experienced funding cuts, wage arrears, economic collapse, disruption of cooperative supply chains, social upheavals, and so on. Trained "effective managers" destroyed almost everything. How can one talk about science, development, and the country's achievements when the refrain was, "Take as much freedom as you can," "Why produce? We'll sell oil and gas and buy what we need," and "the market will decide." Joint ventures were opened to extract resources, with Russia receiving a small share of the profits and the rest going abroad. Moreover, during such difficult, cash-strapped times, they lured many specialists (the brains) away to develop our so-called "Partners." And there's no way to develop properly in such times, so such backwardness has emerged in many areas of science and production that a decade might not suffice, and some say forever, but this is in vain; it's simply a form of psychological pressure.
              Everything will work out for us (I found out).
          3. SAG
            -1
            5 May 2026 12: 54
            Beautiful and clear, everything is to the point!
            You've already been downvoted by the eggheads. What's most touching is that the local downvoters don't offer any justification for their disagreement. Because you have to have brains to justify it!
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 13: 12
              Quote: SAG
              Because you need to have brains to come up with a justification!

              There is a brain (processor), but the software has been reflashed. )))
          4. +1
            6 May 2026 01: 08
            Irokez (Sergey) +2 Today, 11:14 New

            I agree with everything you said - you described a lot and correctly, but not everything.
            The most important thing is that this is all true, but in the same concept that “generals always prepare for the past war.”
            More specifically, dynamics.
            A month ago, people were foaming at the mouth proving that 350nm was never better for anyone.
            28 nm will at least allow us to install our own processors in onboard computers—unless, of course, we leave fighter jet electronics at the level of the 1980s. But God willing, these 28 nm technologies won't appear until after 2030.
            "THERE" is just beginning to tackle military technology. Drones, AI, decision-making systems. And only the lower levels can be made at 28 nm. And although "2-4 nm and even 6-12 nm are a ploy by 'effective managers,'" this doesn't prevent processors made to these conventional standards from having 10 times more transistors per mm2. With a corresponding number of neural network nodes, if for AI.
            And about something more important.
            There are 144 million of us. Despite this, we're not Israel, so we can compete in almost every area of ​​high-tech. (You could even downvote us for being seditious.) That is, we won't be able to keep up with even the best second-world countries in the next 50 years.
            And who will be the leaders we'll join? And what principles will we have to be stingy with?
        2. SAG
          -2
          5 May 2026 11: 17
          When you send your son to school, does the head teacher guarantee the grades he'll get on his graduation certificate? The answer is obvious.
          You can simply buy a certificate with the required grades at the transition center. But everyone still gives it to you, even though there's no responsibility for the end result. And you'll have to invest in checking homework and attending parent-teacher meetings!
      3. 0
        5 May 2026 09: 33
        In China, there was news about the launch of serial production of lithographs.
        1. +2
          5 May 2026 11: 22
          Quote: Goto
          In China, there was news about the launch of serial production of lithographs.


          They've already mastered the production of lithographs with a 7 nm process technology. These lithographs are used to make Chinese 7 nm processors for Huawei smartphones.

          A year ago, Huawei and SMIC achieved a breakthrough by releasing the 7nm HiSilicon Kirin 9000S processor for the Mate 60 Pro smartphone. This achievement was significant given the restrictions placed on the Chinese semiconductor industry. Unfortunately, Huawei's new flagship, the Mate 70 Pro, demonstrates that further progress in chip production in China has slowed. The new device's Kirin 9020 processor is based on 7nm technology. For smartphones, this isn't yet a critical issue, as the chip's performance remains good. However, in the AI ​​segment, the lag in process technology could become a significant obstacle for Huawei.


          https://habr.com/ru/companies/ru_mts/articles/868876/
      4. The comment was deleted.
    2. 0
      5 May 2026 10: 23
      Quote: Mint Gingerbread
      From one needle, Russia has become hooked on another.

      It's sad, on the one hand, but there are simply no other options at this stage. Create our own architecture, set up processor production, write all the necessary software... This is a colossal amount of work that cannot be accomplished within a reasonable timeframe.
      Under these circumstances, the idea of ​​relying on a ready-made solution is entirely reasonable. After all, the Chinese electronics industry emerged in roughly the same way.
      And then... perhaps we'll be able to somehow separate ourselves before China decides to drive us crazy with this technological dependence.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. 0
          5 May 2026 20: 47
          Quote: Sky Strike fighter
          There are options

          Formally, yes. But not very realistically.
          Elbrus has its own architecture, which means we need to fully support it: write compilers, port software, and so on. This process is quite slow. And 130 nm process technology is only for defense and similar industries. It's unlikely that anyone would build a critical information infrastructure (CII) on such processors without administrative coercion.
          The ARM-based Baikal-S sounds interesting, but it's ARM, which carries certain legal risks that not every potential manufacturer would want to deal with. LoongArch, for example, is in Chinese hands, and reaching an agreement with them would certainly be easier than with the British.
          1. DO
            0
            5 May 2026 21: 26
            Quote: Kalmar
            The ARM-based Baikal-S sounds interesting, but it's ARM, which carries certain legal risks that not every potential manufacturer would want to deal with. LoongArch, for example, is in Chinese hands, and reaching an agreement with them would certainly be easier than with the British.

            The ARM ecosystem is currently the second largest in the world after Intel, and this is the most significant practical advantage of the ARM architecture. However, before the sanctions, Baikal only managed to acquire ARM licenses for versions 8 and 9. Subsequent versions are officially unavailable to Russians. Of course, theoretically, there are all sorts of "gray schemes" for acquiring ARM licenses exclusively for the domestic Russian market. However, the publicly available view of this issue is shrouded in mystery.
            Considering that we've apparently reached an agreement with Chinese developers to purchase the current version of the Loongson cores, there's likely a chance to negotiate the purchase of future versions of the cores as well.
            It is still unknown (at least to me) under what conditions the Loongson cores were purchased - with topology sources available for verification or not, with restrictions on the production and sale of chips, or without them.
          2. 0
            6 May 2026 09: 24
            Why negotiate with the British at all? We're essentially in a cold war with them. So, legal risks aside, we're just churning out processors for ourselves, and that's it. And whether it's legal from the British perspective or not doesn't matter.
            1. 0
              6 May 2026 11: 12
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              Why negotiate anything with the British at all?

              First of all, if we want to keep up with the times and utilize the numerous developments in adapting the same software for ARM, the architecture will have to be periodically updated, i.e., somehow bought from the British.
              Besides, we won't be able to make these processors ourselves; we'll have to negotiate with manufacturers in China, for example. And those manufacturers are unlikely to want to antagonize ARM by churning out "unlicensed" products.
      2. +1
        5 May 2026 11: 33
        Elbrus-2S and Elbrus-16S processors.

        Embedded visualization and control systems operating under harsh environmental and operational conditions were demonstrated. In the hardware section, visitors could see laptops, servers, and hardware and software systems based on Elbrus-16S and Elbrus-2S3, as well as finished products such as data storage systems and cyber intrusion detection systems. Large-scale projects implemented on computing systems with Elbrus processors cover electronic payments, government information systems, and production management.


        https://tehnoomsk.ru/archives/24590
      3. -1
        5 May 2026 11: 40
        Quote: Kalmar
        Creating our own architecture, setting up processor production, writing all the necessary software... This is a colossal amount of work that cannot be completed within a reasonable timeframe.

        What are you talking about? Everything you've written has been done here since the Soviet era. Russia is the successor to the USSR and, accordingly, has its own developments and know-how for further development. It's just that we're lagging behind for certain real-life reasons.
        1. +2
          5 May 2026 16: 10
          Unfortunately, everything achieved back then is now hopelessly outdated technical solutions. This isn't the kind of industry where you can mothball everything for 35 years and then declare, "We have everything we need." Even the military-industrial complex needs more than just 350-nm solutions. These are perfectly suitable for individual products like ICBMs. But mass production of UAVs requires more advanced technological processes. This means a lot of work remains, years of catching up, and it would be a good idea to employ reverse engineering. And it's not just "simply" that we're falling behind. On the contrary, things are very complex, and much needs to change. Believe me, I'm not at all happy with the current state of affairs.
          1. 0
            5 May 2026 16: 36
            Quote: VENOM
            This means there is a lot of work ahead, years of catching up, and it would be a good idea to use reverse engineering.

            That's what I'm saying, that it's not all that simple, but we shouldn't give up; we should try to make up for the lost time we've had over the decades. The whole world copies and steals ideas from each other, and we can do that too, but it takes time, money, and smart minds. The road is mastered by the one who walks it.
        2. 0
          5 May 2026 20: 50
          Quote: Irokez
          Everything you wrote was done here since the times of the USSR.

          It was. The problem is that this industry is developing very quickly. And our existing solutions are 15-20 years behind, which is a huge gap by IT standards.
    3. 0
      5 May 2026 21: 10
      Quote: Mint Gingerbread
      Maybe instead of processors, they could share equipment, like allies.

      Why did you share? We used to buy it all.
      In 2006–2008, the Russian company Angstrem-T (Zelenograd) purchased old equipment from AMD (130 nm, then 90 nm technology) at a German plant in Dresden to set up production for €815 million in credit funds.

      They couldn't get it up and running. They had effective managers, after all... Today, they use this equipment to issue Troika plastic cards. They couldn't do anything more serious.
  3. -6
    5 May 2026 07: 15
    Our big chip is the biggest chip in the world! laughing
  4. 0
    5 May 2026 07: 20
    The USSR had a rather poor track record in microelectronics and indigenous developments. Most were "crap"—clones of American products from Motorola, Texas Instruments, IBM, Firechip, and the like. As components became more complex, and as transistors were replaced with integrated circuits and microcircuits, more and more time was spent on reverse engineering, copying, and launching into production. And there weren't many production lines of their own, so imports were the only option. As a result, the USSR fell behind every year, and the Russian Federation was unable to leave any legacy. Without such a legacy, modern Russia simply has nothing to develop and modernize, unlike many other areas where the USSR did leave such a legacy, which is how the Russian Federation survives. Oddly enough, Russia is catastrophically struggling to develop anything new; for now, the ability to "modernize" and develop the Soviet legacy is helping. But this will end sooner or later, the limit of "modernization" will be reached, and then in many areas a situation like with microelectronics will arise, where there is no legacy, where there are no new developments of our own, where there is no equipment for production.
    1. +3
      5 May 2026 15: 50
      In the USSR, things were pretty bad with microelectronics and with their own developments.

      In any sane country striving for leadership in microelectronics, in-house developments based on a completely unique architecture like the Elbrus are shut down, as Intel did with its Itanium line. Because such projects can only be used in the defense industry, while a widely available PC requires the most popular processor architecture in the world, the one for which most software is written, compatible with network architecture, expansion modules, and so on. The USSR understood this and, instead of churning out something original, relied on entirely domestic processor production rather than on a unique architecture.
      Russia, on the contrary, made its own "Elbrus" at Taiwanese facilities. Where is this "Elbrus" now?
      And they completely lost their production base in the 90s.
  5. +4
    5 May 2026 07: 24
    The application to the Ministry of Industry and Trade's registry is expected in the second quarter of 2026, engineering samples in the second quarter of 2027, market launch in 2027, and international market launch in 2028. 1,3 billion rubles should be enough for preparatory work and the production of several thousand processors.
    Isn't it too early to congratulate you on this initiative? Because deadlines are creeping so fast! And we've already seen and heard our fill of all sorts of announcements.
    1. -1
      5 May 2026 09: 09
      Ours are making slow but sure progress. https://tehnoomsk.ru/archives/24509.
      Or here https://tehnoomsk.ru/archives/24420
      Moreover, sometimes they even overtake https://tehnoomsk.ru/archives/24869
      And in the USSR they were late because they didn't give money, they didn't build factories, there were those who said it was easier to sell oil and gas and buy microchips
  6. +1
    5 May 2026 08: 24
    Technological breakthrough or trap?

    The second option is more likely.
  7. +1
    5 May 2026 09: 23
    The movie is interesting. The chip isn't for Windows, but for Linux. Anyone who's used Red Hat Linux had a hard time setting up the OS. That's why they chose Ubuntu, but after all, we have millions of Windows users. Who will be switching to another OS? The article mentions a server CPU, but we're interested in a desktop one.
    1. +3
      5 May 2026 10: 26
      Quote: dragon772
      For anyone who has dealt with Red Hat Linux, it was not an easy time setting up the OS.

      To be fair, modern Linux systems have become quite user-friendly. Much better than, say, ten years ago.
      Then, as far as I understand, there's no talk of the consumer segment yet. First and foremost, I suppose, they'll try to sort out the servers, especially those that support critical infrastructure. There are (for now) plenty of specialists in this area.
      1. 0
        6 May 2026 09: 10
        Linux servers? Hmm, I don't even know. Then workstations would need to run that OS too.
        The user-friendly interface has improved, but the OS hasn't become widespread. Although I remember how we started with UNIX, then switched to NT 3.51.
        1. +1
          6 May 2026 11: 16
          Quote: dragon772
          The user-friendly interface has improved, but the OS hasn't become widespread.

          It didn't become widespread for the simple reason that the average user doesn't benefit from switching to these Linuxes. Consequently, they're reluctant to change their familiar environment.
          In this case, it makes sense to start with government agencies (which is, in fact, what's happening), while simultaneously bringing the software and hardware components to a level where they become interesting to ordinary people.
          There are, however, great concerns that the average person will be "interested" in the usual way: by banning alternatives or making them as difficult to access as possible.
          1. 0
            7 May 2026 11: 11
            There are, however, great concerns that the average person will be "interested" in the usual way: by banning alternatives or making them as difficult to access as possible.

            They'll say: from tomorrow onwards, only Linux OS! They can do that.
        2. 0
          6 May 2026 23: 53
          These days, most servers run Linux. Workstations, however, can run any OS you like...
          1. 0
            7 May 2026 11: 23
            I look at the servers in the Data Center and see Windows Server 2022, 2025.
    2. +1
      5 May 2026 15: 07
      For anyone who has dealt with Red Hat Linux, it was not an easy time setting up the OS.
      You're mistaken! Red Hat Linux was once one of the best consumer operating systems. It's a shame the Germans haven't abandoned it and are only keeping the server side.
      1. 0
        6 May 2026 17: 30
        Quote: Schneeberg
        It's a pity that the Germans haven't abandoned it yet and only left the server part.

        What Germans? They're not even close. Red Hat is now a division of IBM.
        1. 0
          6 May 2026 19: 40
          What Germans? They're not even close. Red Hat is now a division of IBM.
          Initially, these were German developers
          1. 0
            13 May 2026 15: 25
            Red Hat is an American company founded by Mark Ewing, then a student at Carnegie Mellon.
            The Germans made Debian.
            Red Hat currently sells commercial builds (Red Hat Enterprise Linux), but also releases free ones (Fedora, Centos).
            Debian is also very much alive. In fact, these are still the two main driving forces of Linux.
            My personal choice: Debian on the server, Fedora on the PC
  8. 0
    5 May 2026 09: 40
    I wonder when they'll make a lithograph.
    https://new.ras.ru/press-center/perspektivy-lazerno-plazmennogo-istochnika-izlucheniya-dlya-rentgenovskoy-litografii-na-dline-volny-/
  9. +1
    5 May 2026 09: 51
    Excellent article and excellent analysis (the author is great!!!).
    How this happened is a closely guarded secret. The license terms are not disclosed.

    This is the most interesting and mysterious thing.
  10. +1
    5 May 2026 10: 06
    Quote: Carib
    The hardest part is retraining 100,000,000 people to think, work, search, and communicate differently. Tens of thousands of specialized programs. Even Excel spreadsheets won't migrate smoothly to Linux.

    There's no need to retrain anyone. Just set up the corporate environment and that's it. That's the job of the IT guys.
    Firstly, just as Windows has WSL, Linux has Wine.
    Secondly, there are enough MS Office analogues for Linux, you can choose.
    In this way, it is possible to create a unified environment in which the user may not even know what operating system is running.
    Of course, there is software for Windows that has no equivalent for Linux, and even Wine doesn't always help, but that doesn't cover hundreds of millions of workstations...
    1. +3
      5 May 2026 10: 28
      Quote: LuZappa
      There is Wine for Linux.

      Well, yes, but the processor architecture is also very different. At the very least, everything will be slow. At the very most, it will be glitchy.
      Quote: LuZappa
      There are enough MS Office analogues for Linux

      Yes, but migrating documents created in MS Office to these alternatives isn't always seamless, especially if they contain macros.
      1. 0
        5 May 2026 11: 07
        Well, no one promised it would be easy. I just noticed that there's not much difference between the different operating systems for the user. They usually work with what the company provides.

        Again, sometimes the machines are completely virtual in the corporate cloud, and the user is given a device to access it from. Whether it's via RDP or SSH doesn't really matter. Maybe these processors are just right for cloud servers...
      2. 0
        5 May 2026 15: 33
        Microsoft also doesn't always allow documents created in one version to open in others. Office macros are a real pain. Therefore, when transferring files, it's best to use open formats.
      3. 0
        5 May 2026 16: 46
        "Yes, but migrating documents created in MS Office to these alternatives isn't always seamless. Especially if they contain macros."
        It almost always passes through the same place. And instead of creating something new and moving on, you have to waste a ton of time manually transferring what already exists.
    2. -1
      5 May 2026 15: 31
      Don't cast pearls before swine - you are responding to an incompetent and uneducated provocateur!
  11. +2
    5 May 2026 10: 18
    But this is a server processor, it is not at all for office work and 1C, running anything from Windows on it is just for enthusiasts
    1. DO
      0
      7 May 2026 13: 22
      Quote from alexoff
      But this is a server processor, it is not at all for office work and 1C

      Quote: Yandex AI
      1C:Enterprise supports Linux operating systems. This applies to both server, and the client part of the platform. v8.1c.ru1cbit.ruhabr.com
      Supported Linux distributions
      Ubuntu;
      debbian;
      CentOS;
      Astra Linux;
      Red Hat Enterprise Linux;
      Alt Linux. vdgb.ruweb.archive.orgserver-for-1s.rf
      1. 0
        7 May 2026 14: 56
        So, did you run the server part, or did you just stick a server CPU into a regular computer and run it on it? Running programs on server CPUs is a bit of a gamble.
        1. DO
          0
          7 May 2026 16: 42
          alexoff, the article in question is about a multi-core server processor that appears to have already been developed but is not yet in mass production.
          Since the processor is a server one, it will definitely be used in server motherboards.
          For desktops, a separate chip with desktop peripherals will most likely be developed.
          Let's try to predict how many and what kind of cores it will have:
          One LA664 core supports two threads, just like the Intel core.
          Intel desktop processors contain two types of cores: high-performance and energy-efficient. However, in current operating systems, support for these two types of cores is only available in Windows.
          In Linux, two types of kernels are not supported, and energy-efficient kernels have to be disabled, because the system works worse with them than without them.
          The LA664 kernel is not supported by Windows.
          Therefore, supporting two types of kernels is pointless for now.
          Intel's desktop processors contain no more than eight high-performance dual-threaded cores. All desktop software worldwide is designed for Intel desktops, so producing a processor with more than eight high-performance cores is a dubious undertaking.
          Summary: The desktop version of the Irtysh processor will most likely contain desktop peripherals and no more than 8 dual-threaded cores.
  12. +6
    5 May 2026 11: 27
    The article was written by someone who doesn't understand the subject matter. It starts with the title and ends with the reference to "domestic" Linux. Although, the last statement, at least in the historical perspective of Linus Torvalds's homeland, can be interpreted as follows: "The birthplace of Linux is the temporarily lost territories of the Russian Empire. Based on this, Linux can be considered a domestic operating system. :)"

    And 1C in file mode installed on NVMe under Ubuntu works 18-20% faster. Personally tested and repeatedly.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. -1
      5 May 2026 15: 34
      Astra Linux can be considered domestic. The developers told me they completely rebuilt its kernel... Linus Torvalds also created Linux based on Unix...
      1. +1
        5 May 2026 16: 47
        With hands growing from your butt? Yes
        1. -1
          5 May 2026 16: 48
          Are you talking about Torvalds? Are you talking about Torvalds?
          1. +1
            5 May 2026 16: 50
            "Astra Linux can be considered domestic. The developers told me they completely rebuilt its kernel..."
            1. +1
              5 May 2026 17: 22
              Well, the fact that the name is very similar to your nickname doesn't mean anything. laughing Can you rate the qualifications of Astra's developers? Are you a Linux programmer? Have you delved into the operating system kernel? Have you ever built software packages yourself?
              1. +1
                5 May 2026 17: 33
                And this isn't about packages, but about the fact that if I, as an employee, and everyone else like me, were given it, then it should just work, and work natively, according to the "plug and play" principle, and without dancing around with a tambourine and running to the local "electronics" 10 times a day.
                You don't have to be a tailor to see that, for example, the buttons on a suit are sewn on crookedly, right?
                The work of the authors of "Astra" is very similar to -
                "From Russian, only a few security modules, a cryptographic accelerator, and a microchip housing." And at an overpriced price.
                1. -1
                  5 May 2026 17: 37
                  Well, that's not a question for Astra, but for your electronics guys, why they didn't set it up, or for whoever supplied you with such hardware and software. You know, we have plenty of clumsy people in this country, especially among IT professionals. What did you expect, if every poor student who barely graduated from college and took a couple of computer "courses" thinks they're better than Bill Gates?
                  Generally speaking, the user shouldn't have to insert anything themselves except a flash drive. And all peripherals at work should be connected by tech support.
      2. +2
        8 May 2026 11: 22
        Linus started writing his own kernel, not relying on other people's code. As for rebuilding—rebuilding a kernel or making minor changes to someone else's code—it's not that difficult, especially if the changes are cosmetic. Let's also remember Bolgen OS, yeah. :) Although, what's surprising is that in our country, the one thing we've gotten really good at is cutting budgets, creating the right companies, the right founders, the right friends and relatives. There's profit in all directions: you take a ready-made system kernel, with drivers and all that blackjack and courtesans, you take a ready-made display manager, you take a ready-made desktop environment and tweak it all a bit, write a theme for the desktop environment, add a couple of scripts here and there, add four small home-made utilities, and voila! We package the product and sell it! (And not just any old spear, but at a price comparable to commercial operating systems like MS Windows.) A product created by committed communists, because the authors of Linux are, by and large, just that. Each of them contributes to the development of the Linux kernel and related software, according to its capabilities and capabilities, and to each user who needs it, according to their needs. Free! No mandatory payment! If you can, help the project. If you can't, then use it! The product is free, not gratis. It was paid for by the labor of committed communist developers.
        1. -1
          8 May 2026 16: 07
          It's not about the code. The code is secondary. Linus reproduced the architecture and core concepts of UNIX, which was used on "big machines," on personal computers. From that perspective, he didn't invent anything new. And he did it partly so that software from UNIX machines could be used. He just recompiled it for a different kernel, and enjoy.
          Budgets are siphoned everywhere... except, perhaps, North Korea. Well, I suppose they don't siphon much in Arab monarchies. You wouldn't siphon at home, would you? And there, all the important positions are held by the monarch's relatives.
          Linux is, generally speaking, free. It's not the OS that's sold, but the documentation, updates, maintenance, additional libraries and tools, and so on. As for the communists, the GNU license had completely different considerations when they created it. And it doesn't matter what their political views are, as long as the product is good.
          The creators of Astra Linux told me that the kernel was completely rebuilt by domestic developers. Although, yes, it all started with Debian.
  13. -4
    5 May 2026 12: 23
    How wondrous are Your works, Lord! Reading such news makes you think of the government's intellect. Just think about it: businessman Svyatoslav Kapustin, who, according to reputation.ru, ranked 3,779th among those doing business in Omsk in 2024, is in charge of government and strategic microelectronics development issues. Government officials, where are you? Or have you completely washed your hands of this?
  14. +3
    5 May 2026 12: 30
    Irtysh also has its own peculiarity: it is not directly compatible with Windows.

    I understand. You don't need to understand something to write about it. But in your own article, in your own words, not being able to understand it???
    You're saying the processor isn't compatible with Windows. Why would it need that? You yourself said the processor is for servers. It's Ubuntu. Or some other Linux distribution.
  15. +2
    5 May 2026 13: 41
    1C programs have long existed in Linux versions - accounting, trading, and more specialized ones.
  16. osp
    +2
    5 May 2026 14: 34
    Why didn't the author write anything about KomDiv processors?
    They came out in the late 90s and early 00s. From the Scientific Research Institute of System Analysis of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
    The Kurchatov Institute worked on their production.
    They went into space and defense, but with mass production they could easily have been used to equip the handheld computers of those years.
    Yoshkar-Ola provided metal-ceramic cases, but they didn't want to make them plastic.
  17. +1
    5 May 2026 16: 27
    "But when Windows is unavailable, demand arises. This means that programmers will emerge who will learn to write for other platforms. Companies will emerge that will build a business on this."
    Author: Are you serious? No one will write software for a small market unless they pay a lot of money; it's simply not profitable. And those who use this processor will likely have to hire IT specialists to write software that's needed right now for a specific company. For example, Astra, which is built on "open source Linux," has some drivers that are as ancient as mammoth guano, and no one seems to be in a hurry to update them, which often leads to a struggle just to get a printer or other peripheral working.
    Therefore it will be so that
    "As a result, Irtysh users will find themselves in a closed world with a limited set of software, where half of their vital tasks simply won't have a solution."
    1. 0
      6 May 2026 07: 39
      Quote from AdAstra
      As a result, Irtysh users will find themselves in a closed world with a limited set of software

      Well, of course, the LoongArch architecture is being actively developed by the Chinese bros. Therefore, there's a chance to follow their lead and leverage their developments in porting essential and important software to these processors. Which, in principle, is in line with the current approaches to import substitution. Seriously, the Chinese have the resources to create a new ecosystem, and they don't even need to build it from scratch. As long as they share with us.
      1. +1
        6 May 2026 17: 43
        Not just Chinese. LoongArch is currently actively developing Basalt. This architecture actually originates from mips.
  18. +3
    5 May 2026 17: 02
    Quote: Aleksandral
    If there's a will, there's anything you can do, even your own OS! And there's no task impossible!

    Already! It's called MSVS. The main improvement: in all windows, the "Ok"/"Cancel" buttons have been replaced with "Yes sir"/"No way."
  19. 0
    5 May 2026 17: 06
    Quote: futurohunter
    MacBooks usually run MacOS and Windows.

    Why? I don't have Windows on my Mac. Although I've seen people install Windows on Macs with Intel processors...
  20. 0
    5 May 2026 17: 09
    Quote: kuks
    You write that the processor is not compatible with Windows. Why does it need that?

    Why did Elbrus need lintel?
  21. DO
    0
    5 May 2026 18: 01
    Manufacturers claim that their chip performs no worse than popular analogs, although each of its individual cores works slower. But in серверах It doesn't matter - the main thing is that many cores work simultaneously, and not that one core is as fast as possible.
    Tests showed: server This chip easily handles large user flows and responds quickly to requests. This is quite sufficient for banks and large IT systems. If anyone's wondering, the Irtysh isn't a gaming processor—the screen image will be very choppy. But that's not what the chip was designed for.

    Yes, it seems that the 16-, 32-, and 64-core Irtysh processors on the proven LA664 cores from Loongson are quite decent server processors today.
    But let's read on:
    Irtysh also has its own peculiarity: it is not directly compatible with Windows. (...)
    The lack of Windows support is Irtysh's main challenge for mass adoption. For decades, corporate Russia has been built on Windows: accounting databases, document management, specialized software for banks, factories, and hospitals. Migrating all this to the unfamiliar Linux platform is not just difficult, but for many companies, impossible.

    1) The author above wrote absolutely correctly that the Irtysh is server CPU.
    What Yandex AI says about global statistics, unlike the author server operating systems:
    "As of 2025, Linux is expected to account for approximately 63,1% of the global server operating system market, making it the leader in this field.
    Supercomputers. Since 2017, 100% of the world's 500 most powerful supercomputers run Linux.
    Web servers. According to W3Techs data from July 2025, 57,3% of web servers use Linux, while Windows accounts for only 10,7%.
    Cloud platforms. Linux powers 92% of virtual machines in clouds (AWS, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure).
    AI projects. According to a Gartner report for 2024, 85% of new AI projects in the cloud are deployed on Linux.
    2) "Accounting databases, document management, specialized software for banks, factories, and hospitals," that is, server software for critical information infrastructure (for which the Irtysh trusted server processor is actually being created) under sanctions (Microsoft and its Windows OS officially left Russia in 2022) have been transitioning to Russian Linux distributions for years now through the efforts of Russians (Astra OS for state secrets, RedOS, Alt, and others for confidential servers).

    Without Windows, the processor loses access to a vast universe of programs. Millions of applications—from the familiar 1C and Office to highly specialized engineering suites—were created specifically for this OS. Adapting them to another platform would require colossal expenditures, which no one would bear for the sake of a negligible market. As a result, Irtysh users will find themselves in a closed world with a limited software selection, where half of their vital tasks simply won't have a solution.

    1) The "universe of programs" mentioned by the author are applications for desktop computers. The Irtysh processor under discussion is designed for servers.
    2) Government and corporate sectors are FORCED to migrate their desktop computers to Linux OS distributions certified in Russia (such as Rosa OS), primarily for security reasons. Secondly, the most common trusted Russian ARM processors, developed by Baikal Electronics, do not support Windows.
    3) If the "office" requires a Windows application and there's absolutely no alternative, the only option is to use it on a workstation with an Intel processor and Windows OS. Moreover, a proven, non-updated build of pirated Windows is safer than a licensed Windows in today's Russian conditions. It's highly recommended to completely disconnect such an Intel computer running Windows from the internet.
  22. -3
    5 May 2026 18: 07
    Basically, it's a useless processor. Like a circumpolar orbital station: common sense sacrificed for who knows what. It won't be bought.
    .
    Build a Windows processor and dedicate one core to Macs and one to Linux. Office applications don't require much power and will run any program.
  23. +3
    5 May 2026 22: 12
    Evgeny Fedorov, what's Russian about this chip? Or are you just trying to convince us it's Russian? Russian chips need to be made in Russia, to avoid any questions or doubts later!
    1. osp
      +1
      6 May 2026 01: 53
      As far as I know, nothing Russian.
      Yoshkar-Ola has not yet produced cases with such a number of contact points.
      And there you also need gold wire for welding, compounds and substrates.
      Not to mention silicon wafers.
    2. +2
      6 May 2026 07: 45
      Quote: SEVERIN
      What's Russian about this chip?

      It's a philosophical question. Take, for example, Apple Silicon processors—whose origin are they? They were supposedly developed by Apple, but they're based on the British ARM architecture, and manufactured by TSMC in Taiwan using Dutch ASML lithographs. The nature of this segment means that very few companies can establish a full cycle of development and production in-house.
      1. 0
        6 May 2026 19: 45
        You're also a naive person - who invented Windows? - and who made it? - who invented the radio, and who patented it? - who created the incandescent light bulb, and who, again, patented it - that is, you must imagine how many thieves and various scoundrels there are in our world?.. - Why are you asking? - The main thing is to steal!
        1. +3
          6 May 2026 21: 37
          My point is that Irtysh is being developed using a fairly popular scheme these days: license an existing architecture, develop a processor based on it, and commission its production somewhere in Asia (China, Taiwan, South Korea, etc.). Mobile processors, for example, are mostly made this way.
          1. 0
            6 May 2026 21: 49
            You're not considering the possible dual purpose of this chip—is it worth trusting its production to a foreign manufacturer if we know it's going to be used in defense products? After all, we've had cases where irons purchased in China contained eavesdropping devices, as well as Chinese computers. Are you sure your information won't be leaked to an enemy server? I wouldn't trust classified information to imported hardware.
            1. osp
              +1
              7 May 2026 01: 59
              The military department (through the 22nd Central Research Institute) used to be well aware that microchips developed in Russia were being manufactured at foreign factories—in Germany, for example, at X-FAB. But they kept quiet, because they assumed that if it was developed here, it was ours. So there you have it.
              But it's impossible to organize quality control there. Just as testing of finished microchips is already here.
              If the manufacturer has used the wrong materials or has intentionally not washed the plates properly, the service life of such microcircuits can be significantly reduced.
              Especially if it is space or aviation, where there are constant temperature fluctuations and overloads.
              In the case of Minsk, the customer representative was at Integral. They knew the technology and materials.
              In the case of the Riga "Alpha" chip, it was no longer in use. But the chips were used for military purposes because they were certified. Although this level is two heads below—mostly analog and 572-series ADC/DAC.
              1. 0
                7 May 2026 05: 40
                osp
                0
                Today, 01: 59

                That's all in the past; microelectronics' capabilities have now increased, and in this sense, Russia is lagging behind its competitors, and catching up is becoming increasingly difficult every year.
            2. 0
              7 May 2026 11: 29
              Quote: SEVERIN
              Is it worth trusting its production to a foreign manufacturer?

              For the military, it's not worth it, but they have their own atmosphere. For the civilian segment, I don't see anything objectionable; all the equipment there is foreign anyway.
              1. 0
                7 May 2026 19: 11
                Kalmar
                0
                Today
                For the military, it's not worth it, but they have their own atmosphere. For the civilian segment, I don't see anything objectionable; all the equipment there is foreign anyway.
                - So that's the thing, it's not worth it for the military - this is the basis for all the mistrust of imported electronics, and in general - you need to have your own electronics to avoid nuances, doubts and incidents.
                1. 0
                  7 May 2026 22: 04
                  Quote: SEVERIN
                  You need to have your own electronics to avoid nuances, doubts and incidents

                  Maybe. But the reality is, few people have "their own" electronics. Really, very few. So, for civilian use, they take "foreign" ones without the slightest hesitation—even the Chinese. You shouldn't emulate the military: you're unlikely to like a military-grade computer, especially if you have to buy it with your own money.
                  1. 0
                    8 May 2026 05: 46
                    Kalmar
                    0
                    Yesterday, 22: 04
                    Maybe. But in reality, few people have their own electronics.
                    - but Russia needs to have its own electronics, especially considering that our only allies are the Russian army and navy.
        2. 0
          7 May 2026 10: 15
          SEVERIN
          A pointless conversation. Besides Alexander Graham Bell, two other people invented the telephone simultaneously. Nikola Tesla experimented with radio waves and built a radio-controlled boat even before Popov and Marconi. The basic ideas behind the multi-window interface used in Windows, and in modern software in general, were developed at Xerox. Incidentally, Microsoft and Apple had a long legal battle over this very interface, and they're still stealing ideas from each other. IBM created modern personal computers, but within six months, competitors had outpaced it, and IBM practically lost that market. As soon as Apple released a multimedia smartphone with a touchscreen, competitors immediately seized on the idea and are squeezing Apple and its iPhones from every angle.
          You can't stop progress, and the market even less so.
          By the way, it's not always about stealing. Sometimes the time comes to implement an idea, and several people or companies simultaneously create something similar. Throughout the 19th century, people tried to build airplanes, but only the Wright brothers were able to fly. Although, for example, Hiram Maxim (the inventor of that very same machine gun) also built an airplane, but he only managed to fly 10 years after the Wright brothers. Just don't mention Mozhaysky—his plane couldn't fly at all.
          1. -2
            7 May 2026 19: 19
            Besides the squabbles between Popov and Marconi, in which Popov was the first to invent radio, the Wright brothers also competed with our own Zhukovsky... - and anyway - whose side are you trying to defend? - and talking about the pointlessness of the dispute has no Russian patriotism, which is why I ask - whose side are you on? You don't look like a Russian.
            1. -1
              8 May 2026 09: 09
              Your knowledge amazes me. laughing Popov and Marconi didn't interact directly with each other, as they worked in different countries. It's likely that they didn't interact during their lifetimes, or even during their descendants', and most likely for political reasons. Let me remind you again about Tesla.
              The Wright brothers and Zhukovsky are simply ridiculous. Zhukovsky was a theoretician and never built a single airplane. The Wright brothers were practical people, building the first airplanes that actually flew. Many attempts had preceded them, but none had succeeded. The Wright brothers were familiar with Zhukovsky's work and incorporated it into their own work. But Zhukovsky drew some of his conclusions after their flights. Therefore, the Wright brothers had many flaws that were later corrected by other aircraft designers.
              I defend objective reality and nothing more. I'm against such nonsense as "Russia is the birthplace of elephants." How is that any better than "the ancient Ukrainians dug the Black Sea"?

              You don't look Russian
              Funny, right? Russians are supposed to be stupid, right?
              1. -2
                8 May 2026 20: 33
                Your assertion that Russia is the birthplace of elephants is truly stupid - I am surprised by this assertion of yours, but radio was indeed invented by Popov, and it was patented (stolen) by Marconi - it is strange that you did not pay attention to this and did not dispute it.
                1. 0
                  9 May 2026 14: 29
                  "Russia is the birthplace of elephants"—that's your style. Don't sugarcoat the facts. Russia has invented many things, and there are just as many outside its borders. What difference does it make? These inventions are the heritage of all humanity.
                  Marconi didn't steal anything; he conducted experiments simultaneously with Popov. In fact, Faraday theoretically predicted electromagnetic waves, and Maxwell developed the theory back in 1864! And the idea of ​​their practical application, like the idea of ​​aviation, was literally in the air. Only the lazy didn't talk or write about it. The word "radio" was coined by Crookes in 1873. In 1876, Thomas Edison conducted the first experiments with a "spark telegraph." In other words, he was the first to transmit and receive a radio signal! Moreover, he patented his radio transmission system for ships in 1886! From 1885 to 89, Heinrich Hertz conducted a series of experiments in which he experimentally proved Maxwell's theoretical conclusions about the existence of electromagnetic waves. In 1888, Hertz published a scientific paper on the properties of radio waves. In 1890, Édouard Branly created the first device for detecting radio waves—the coherer. It was this device that Popov and Marconi used in their first devices. In 1894, Oliver Lodge improved the coherer. He also began lecturing on radio waves and demonstrating experiments on their transmission. In early 1890,
                  Alexander Popov's work was inspired by the work of Tesla and Hertz. In 1895, he created his first radio receiver. In 1896, Popov conducted the first successful radio transmission. All of Popov's subsequent work focused on improving his devices, ensuring stable communication, and the practical application of radio waves. Popov was also the first to propose the principle of radar.
                  Marconi conducted his first experiments with radio transmission in 1894, meaning he began his work almost simultaneously with Popov. In 1897, Marconi succeeded in transmitting a signal over a distance of over 15 km. He also founded the first commercial radio communications company.
                  While Popov didn't patent his work, Marconi began patenting his devices as early as 1896. Moreover, Popov worked primarily for the Navy, while Marconi, like a true Italian, attempted to commercialize his developments. Incidentally, he was rejected for a long time. In the US, Marconi was rejected for a long time, recognizing Tesla's priority. Incidentally, there was a serious conflict between Marconi and Tesla over this issue. In 1943, the US Supreme Court overturned Marconi's radio patent and recognized that the key technologies had been first developed by three people: Nikola Tesla, Oliver Lodge, and John Stone. As a reminder, Popov never patented his work.
                  Nikola Tesla first transmitted electromagnetic energy over a distance in 1891. In 1893, Tesla first transmitted and received a radio signal of a given frequency. In 1901, Tesla began construction of his worldwide radio transmission system. Tests were successful, but the system required significant investment, and in 1905, the investor withdrew funding. However, Tesla was, in fact, proposing a prototype of the modern internet. Tesla also received numerous patents for his devices for transmitting and receiving radio waves.
                  As you can see, Tesla, Popov, and Marconi were working at roughly the same time, although Tesla began a little earlier. However, many scientists, engineers, and inventors contributed to the creation and development of modern radio communication. And the debates on the topic of "who was first?" are simply vile, petty and meaningless..
                  And don't argue with the radio engineer!
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. The comment was deleted.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        7 May 2026 00: 03
        However, unlike many others, Apple has seriously optimized ARM cores starting with the A6, and then even started making its own graphics processors. That's why their mobile processors are the best in the world.
        1. -1
          7 May 2026 10: 07
          That's a big question. The Chinese are hot on their heels, and they'll eventually crush the stub. And there are plenty of other technologies besides mobile devices. And iOS and MacOS are direct relatives of Linux.
  24. +5
    6 May 2026 07: 58
    Without Windows, the processor loses access to a vast universe of programs. Millions of applications—from the familiar 1C and Office to specialized engineering suites—were created specifically for this OS. Adapting them to another platform would require colossal costs, which no one would bear for the sake of a negligible market.


    Absolutely wrong examples.
    1. The comments cite examples of Open Office systems, of which there are easily five. Yes, they're not perfect, but they're quite functional. For those with specialized Excel spreadsheets and dedicated Windows computers (or virtual machines or RDPs), that's 1% of the total number of users.
    2. 1C Enterprise has had Linux versions for over a decade. Currently, the system is in production use on Windows, Linux, and Mac - https://v8.1c.ru/tekhnologii/systemnye-trebovaniya-1s-predpriyatiya-8/operatsionnye-sistem . I've personally worked with Linux - it's quite good.
    1. -1
      7 May 2026 10: 05
      I'd add that Linux has its own "universe" of software, which is in many ways better than Windows, and some software only runs on Linux. Or is better implemented on Linux than on Windows. For example, most DevOps, system administration, and information security tools.
  25. +1
    6 May 2026 10: 05
    I still don't understand what the money was spent on?
  26. +3
    6 May 2026 11: 37
    Without Windows, the processor loses access to a vast universe of programs. Millions of applications—from the familiar 1C and Office to specialized engineering suites—are created specifically for this OS.

    Auto, educate yourself on your illiteracy. 1C has been running on Linux for a hundred years, and for 99% of Linux users, office suites are no worse than Windows ones. Stop repeating the Windows vendors' idiotic tales that Russia will die a miserable death without Windows. Nothing of the sort—in a few years, only unwashed idiots will be using Windows, much like the ones who use iOS now.
  27. -1
    6 May 2026 19: 19
    will be made in China

    That's the worst part.
  28. 0
    6 May 2026 23: 47
    There were news reports that Russian developers were removed from the Linux kernel development team. So, in reality, only various add-ons to the Linux kernel can be considered domestic.
    1. -1
      7 May 2026 10: 01
      There are domestic builds—Astra Linux, Alt Linux, RED OS, and others. Everything there is domestic. And who cares about these "commands"? China has been going this way for a long time.
  29. 0
    7 May 2026 10: 40
    My computer has been running pirated Windows for 15 years without updates, so there are people with the skills to do it. So, saying Windows can be blocked is an exaggeration. Can a country even create a single secure distribution? A license agreement? To live with wolves is to howl like a wolf. Instead, we'll spend billions on creating a sovereign Linux operating system.
    1. DO
      -1
      7 May 2026 13: 51
      Panin, are you suggesting that ALL Russian critical information infrastructure, including the government, military-industrial complex, army, and energy sector, run pirated Windows and Intel processors (which have a hardware IME bug that can brick the processor via the network)? :)))
      It's funny, but sometimes development requires Windows applications, for which there's absolutely no Linux replacement. Yes, an Intel computer with Windows is required. And if it's a serious company, that computer should be securely isolated from the internet, and preferably even physically disconnected from the local network.
      1. +2
        8 May 2026 11: 29
        There are definitely no bugs in Chinese processors! Right!? They're our friends! Right!? And the fact that they virtualized Intel platforms on their motherboards before loading the BIOS doesn't count? They just did it for fun, out of pure altruism! Why would they sell such uber-wafers to their partners!? They're partners forever! There can never be any disagreement with them, right!
        1. 0
          8 May 2026 11: 39
          PS: And all this, instead of systematically refining the truly necessary, in many ways unique, and promising Elbrus, is being driven by RISK-V and the full cycle of development, from growing 300mm wafers to creating our own lithographs with acceptable resolution standards. And also, accessibility and maximum documentation, including on the internal architecture and schedulers of domestic processors, so that highly efficient code can be written in ASMA, even on the frankly weak hardware of domestic processors by today's standards. And not all this: you have 30 conditional registers and, generally, write in C. Don't go below. There are restrictions and subscriptions there!
          1. DO
            0
            9 May 2026 00: 52
            The Elbrus architecture has already occupied its niches (HPC, DSP, embedded solutions like ATMs, onboard equipment for military vehicles, etc.), and is unlikely to expand beyond these niches due to the challenges of creating highly specific software, not to mention the peculiarities of the architecture.
            RISK-V is basically an architecture for microcontrollers - in fact, they are created and produced on it in Russia, and are quite popular.
            For RISK-V to be suitable for general-purpose multi-core processors, it needs significant refinement. And the scope of refinement is so extensive that it would have been easier to just buy a customized core. But it seems the only thing we were able to buy was a Chinese-made core with a modified MIPS architecture. And even then, I was quite surprised that the Chinese would cooperate in this sensitive area.
            There's no denying the need for domestic technology to produce modern multi-core processors. If this issue isn't resolved, at least for critical information infrastructure (CII), surviving under sanctions will be extremely challenging.
        2. DO
          0
          9 May 2026 00: 28
          I think that Chinese processors have bookmarks, like everyone else.
          But the article is talking about purchasing kernels, most likely with source code for verification (otherwise, the whole idea would be pointless). Russian developers add trusted nodes—the bootloader, interfaces, etc.—to verified kernels. The result is a trusted development.
          What don't you understand here?
    2. +1
      9 May 2026 21: 16
      Panin
      Safe distributions include Astra Linux and Alt Linux. There's no need to copy the clunky and buggy Windows. Linux is more reliable and secure. And domestic distributions were created 10 years ago—don't worry about that. They've already received all possible security certifications from the FSB and FSTEC.
      And yes, even with an internet connection, Microsoft can block your Windows at any time. And pirated builds of Windows are downright unsafe.
  30. +1
    8 May 2026 15: 59
    Another Skolkovo for enrichment
  31. 0
    11 May 2026 20: 06
    In what year - count
    In what land - guess
    On the highway
    Seven peasants came together:
    ..................
    We got together and argued:
    Who lives happily,
    Free in Russia?
  32. +1
    12 May 2026 20: 04
    We simply have no choice. Liberals have been repeating the mantra "we'll buy it from the West" for 30 years. They've repeated it...
  33. +1
    12 May 2026 21: 21
    Another Skolkovo for budget theft
  34. 0
    13 May 2026 09: 09
    If domestic hardware and software continue to develop, the striped ones won't crush Windows—it's not profitable. But if you rely entirely on them, they might. So, this is good news; we're really looking forward to the lithograph in 2027.