4 ms·

I would honestly rather Microsoft work directly with Intel/AMD/Nvidia to make a chip. I don't generally like Apple's direction to make the chips in house, and n

I would honestly rather Microsoft work directly with Intel/AMD/Nvidia to make a chip. I don't generally like Apple's direction to make the chips in house, and not sure I want Microsoft going the same path.

spideymans 6y ago
Assuming Microsoft has the talent to pull it off, Microsoft designing their own chips to run Windows is the best case scenario for performance. Apple has been a case study in how vertical integration, and how designing software and hardware together, can yield immense performance benefits. However, it would be a terrible move for interoperability. OEMs would be inclined to purchase Microsoft's chips (MS's vertical integration would mean that their chips would outperform the competition when running Windows), and Microsoft could in turn restrict their chips to the Windows operating system.
- hakfoo 6y ago
  I suspect one side aspect of the "integration" angle for Apple was that they were able to force the "recompile the world" moment on demand. How much performance do you get by taking, say, code originally written for a 10-year-old compiler whose default target was vanilla i486, and build wuuth a recently built compiler? I'd expect wins from targeting a more modern instruction set, plus 10 years of general "we've learned more about optimization". Microsoft can't do that without an architecture change, and if they do that, they're basically abandoning their primary push to consumers: your established software and workflow investments are no longer safe on Windows.
sally1620 6y ago
They already did that with SQ1 and SQ2. They collaborated with Qualcomm on this. Also, the main motivation is the cost. Any other vendor would want the highest profit out of their design.
- partiallypro 6y ago
  I understand the reasons, but I believe it is likely bad for the industry overall. Soon we'll have Apple, Microsoft and Google chips instead of AMD, Intel and Qualcomm chips; and they can leverage them to lock people even more into their walled garden ecosystems. That is a big worry to me, that feels like going backwards.

spideymans 6y ago

Assuming Microsoft has the talent to pull it off, Microsoft designing their own chips to run Windows is the best case scenario for performance. Apple has been a case study in how vertical integration, and how designing software and hardware together, can yield immense performance benefits. However, it would be a terrible move for interoperability. OEMs would be inclined to purchase Microsoft's chips (MS's vertical integration would mean that their chips would outperform the competition when running Windows), and Microsoft could in turn restrict their chips to the Windows operating system.

hakfoo 6y ago
I suspect one side aspect of the "integration" angle for Apple was that they were able to force the "recompile the world" moment on demand. How much performance do you get by taking, say, code originally written for a 10-year-old compiler whose default target was vanilla i486, and build wuuth a recently built compiler? I'd expect wins from targeting a more modern instruction set, plus 10 years of general "we've learned more about optimization". Microsoft can't do that without an architecture change, and if they do that, they're basically abandoning their primary push to consumers: your established software and workflow investments are no longer safe on Windows.

sally1620 6y ago

They already did that with SQ1 and SQ2. They collaborated with Qualcomm on this. Also, the main motivation is the cost. Any other vendor would want the highest profit out of their design.

partiallypro 6y ago
I understand the reasons, but I believe it is likely bad for the industry overall. Soon we'll have Apple, Microsoft and Google chips instead of AMD, Intel and Qualcomm chips; and they can leverage them to lock people even more into their walled garden ecosystems. That is a big worry to me, that feels like going backwards.