A couple things. Dealing with are is not just % cost, put lawyers and time. If you are small company that is very valuable. The choice WD made is not about co

A couple things. Dealing with are is not just % cost, put lawyers and time. If you are small company that is very valuable. The choice WD made is not about cost but about an architecture that is adoptable adaptability. The whole argument is that you DON'T have to be apply to make it worth it to get a costume chip. Also, you will have more venders to choice from when doing a product. > Bottom line is that I think it is great to have the ability to create computers that are not beholden to a certain vendor but I don't see the vector for getting them into general distribution where consumers actually benefit from the change. End consumers never benefit from any individual technology. They buy product and that work. RISC-V is more important for the overall industry and specially for those interested in open source. As long as we base everything on proprietary ISA we can not have open chip projects that run lots of common software and that stops open silicon in its tracks, and with that open hardware as a whole. RISC-V enables open source culture to be even legally possible and making it practically viable.