3 ms·
Hmm, plenty of other architectures to go to if ARM gets hard to license, IMO. In fact, there are already plenty of people using RISC-V who would have otherwise
by qiqitori 5y ago
Hmm, plenty of other architectures to go to if ARM gets hard to license, IMO. In fact, there are already plenty of people using RISC-V who would have otherwise used ARM. Not sure if it's even beneficial for the semiconductor industry having ARM the way it is right now.
I work in embedded systems and ARM doesn't offer much benefit to me, so maybe I'm biased.
- basilgohar 5y agoI'm not opposed to this. I'm all for a more open architecture. I think AMD's already got their foot in the door with regards to ARM, though. Moreover, ARM is already dominant in mobile- and low-power markets. It'd be great if they also explored alternative (and more open/libre) architectures like OpenPOWER and RISC-V, but I feel like they're not headed in that direction at this time – not sure what that would buy them in comparison to ARM. I think technical superiority has rarely been the deciding factor in architecture dominance – otherwise, x86 likely never would have dragged along this far.