3 ms·
On balance, protecting. When ARM was bought by SoftBank the main argument for it being acceptable was that SoftBank were not chip manufacturers in their own ri
by lonelyasacloud 5y ago
On balance, protecting.
When ARM was bought by SoftBank the main argument for it being acceptable was that SoftBank were not chip manufacturers in their own right. And that because of this, ARM would have every incentive to carry on treating all of ARM's existing customers reasonably fairly under SoftBank's ownership.
That's obviously not the case with Nvidia.
So while, it's possible to imagine that Nvidia wouldn't (at least initially) abuse any ownership of ARM. From a societal pov, why risk allowing a situation that relies on humans behaving well on an ongoing basis not to fail? And two, given the way ARM operates i.e. all customer $$$'s are equal, why would Nvidia bother if they didn't think there was an advantage?