3 ms·
This is literally what competition looks like, the opposite of a monopoly. Isn't that what we all want?
by capitalsigma 5y ago
This is literally what competition looks like, the opposite of a monopoly. Isn't that what we all want?
- dvdkon 5y agoYes, it's certainly better than a Qualcomm monoculture would be. But ideally competition on CPUs would happen in the CPU market, instead of in the target product market with lots of vertical integration. In a world where all device manufacturers design (or even fab) their own CPUs and make their own software/cloud services (we're already there in some ways, sadly), any newcomer would have to start with transistors and work their way up to a long-term cloud ecosystem. That probably won't happen any time soon, standalone chip designers will continue to be competitive or at least good enough, but you can see how proprietary chips can actually make competition harder in some ways.
- dehrmann 5y agoI'd prefer a handful of architectures driven by industry groups. A competition free-for-all optimizes for architecture advancements and better software from vertically integrated players, but limits software from smaller players.
- fendy3002 5y agoIf it's vendor locked, then it'll be vendor-scoped monopoly rather than global-scoped monopoly. If Microsoft start manufacturing their own CPU and locking the OS for their model only, it can be said that Microsoft monopolize the windows hardware market.