3 ms·
> RISC-V has its place Apart from IP issues I'm not seeing much reason for a computer builder to go with RISC-V even if the hardware existed. The ARM ISA and
by mhh__ 5y ago
> RISC-V has its place
Apart from IP issues I'm not seeing much reason for a computer builder to go with RISC-V even if the hardware existed.
The ARM ISA and more importantly all the support i.e. documentation and compilers etc. just seems more appealing to me than RISC-V even if RISC-V is pretty clean. I don't think there's all that much in it, but at least with ARM you have a singular entity to sue if something goes wrong, whereas RISC-V is kind of a risk in that regard.
I want one, but I have no expectation of ever owning a proper RISC-V desktop machine.
- warrenm 5y ago"proper" RISC-V machines may be a ways off ... but a "singular entity to sue" isn't what folks interested in RISC-V are trying to avoid (at least, none of the people I've talked to about it) As it is, there's not really a "singular entity to sue" even in the ARM world - all the licensees out there might be lawsuit targets (if they really blundered something horrifically), but ARM Holdings isn't going to be a serious target