4 ms·

True that. It sucks that the people at the top use the government to stifle innovation for everyone else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_Chip_Pro

by Cieplak 11y ago

True that. It sucks that the people at the top use the government to stifle innovation for everyone else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_Chip_Protection_Act_of_1984 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_Chip_Protection_... Edit: The context for the Chip Protection Act is actually in Intel's primary wikipedia page: "During the late 1980s and 1990s (after this law was passed), Intel also sued companies that tried to develop competitor chips to the 80386 CPU.[32] The lawsuits were noted to significantly burden the competition with legal bills, even if Intel lost the suits.[32] Antitrust allegations had been simmering since the early 1990s and had been the cause of one lawsuit against Intel in 1991. In 2004 and 2005, AMD brought further claims against Intel related to unfair competition." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel

sitkack 11y ago
The Chinese have no need to make x86 compatible parts. Riscv or a home grown arch would work as well or better
- chii 11y ago
  if they intend to sell to foreign markets, they sure do. RISC custom chips may be useful for homegrown tech, or embedded systems, but the consumer market cant possibly be like that - every one expects their software to work everywhere!
  - zanny 11y ago
    Android iOS and Chrome OS have been very popular despite not running Windows x86 binaries.
    - nickpsecurity 11y ago
      What's their market share for desktops in office, entertainment, and business sectors? Probably almost nothing in favor of mostly Windows and Mac OS X desktops running Intel or AMD processors. Legacy compatibility, both OS and popular software, is extremely important for marketing a CPU. Notice how iOS and Chrome OS specifically targeted a sector where that didn't matter. Of course, now the effect applies to those two where people wanting iOS were stuck with ObjectiveC and ARM while people targeting ChromeOS had to support its ecosystem/model. Legacy effect just shifts here. Truly portable and self-contained software is rare these days. Mostly only OSS stuff.

by Cieplak 11y ago

sitkack 11y ago

The Chinese have no need to make x86 compatible parts. Riscv or a home grown arch would work as well or better

chii 11y ago
if they intend to sell to foreign markets, they sure do. RISC custom chips may be useful for homegrown tech, or embedded systems, but the consumer market cant possibly be like that - every one expects their software to work everywhere!
- zanny 11y ago
  Android iOS and Chrome OS have been very popular despite not running Windows x86 binaries.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    What's their market share for desktops in office, entertainment, and business sectors? Probably almost nothing in favor of mostly Windows and Mac OS X desktops running Intel or AMD processors. Legacy compatibility, both OS and popular software, is extremely important for marketing a CPU. Notice how iOS and Chrome OS specifically targeted a sector where that didn't matter. Of course, now the effect applies to those two where people wanting iOS were stuck with ObjectiveC and ARM while people targeting ChromeOS had to support its ecosystem/model. Legacy effect just shifts here. Truly portable and self-contained software is rare these days. Mostly only OSS stuff.