3 ms·

> open consortium You expect an open consortium to continue to innovate in an industry leading way? An open consortium is how you kill ARM. ARM didn't get wh

> open consortium You expect an open consortium to continue to innovate in an industry leading way? An open consortium is how you kill ARM. ARM didn't get where it is now by being sub-par. I appreciate your intent and it seems like a nice idea, but my experience with community development means ARM would turn into an absolute shit show as various stakeholders fight for control and ram through a mish-mash of their pet personal features.

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
Everytime I see someone recommend a special interest group or consortium… I think of Bluetooth and it’s literally thousands of pages spec. Then when they have the chance to almost completely start over… the make BLE with approximately 1/2 of what people want and spend years bloating the spec on that too. I’ll take a talented lunatic with autonomy over 20 different voices in a bureaucratic community every time.
- thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
  And how many PCI-E cards do you think this comment took to reach my screen?
- wallacoloo 5y ago
  so your argument against consortiums (bluetooth) is that they work?… but at a higher cost (lengthy specs)? the historic alternative is a slightly lower cost (most of BT complexity is of the plumbing type, not the PhD type) and much more significant market risks (due to incompatibilities: smaller addressable market and less ability to pivot from one market to a different one). from the engineer PoV, i agree with you: i’d love for these specifications to be simplified. from the business PoV, i don’t think it actually matters that much.
- Melatonic 5y ago
  A consortium of nations interested in maintaining access to reliable compute and innovation might be interesting. As in not bought out explicitly but some kind of direct and regular investment
thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
That's how Arm already works! The customers help to set the roadmap. There's also prior art in RISC-V
- 01100011 5y ago
  Is that a consortium? I work at a big tech company and our customers also request features of which we are the final arbiter. Does that make us a consortium?
  - thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
    I inferred your argument as being that consortia are bad because of what they do (pet features), not what they are.
    - 01100011 5y ago
      Without a central arbiter who takes responsibility for producing a consistent and coherent design, you would likely end up with a mish mash of pet features. If a customer asks for a feature, you can say no if it is a bad choice. You have less leverage to do so when that 'customer' is really a paying member of a consortium.

SV_BubbleTime 5y ago

Everytime I see someone recommend a special interest group or consortium… I think of Bluetooth and it’s literally thousands of pages spec. Then when they have the chance to almost completely start over… the make BLE with approximately 1/2 of what people want and spend years bloating the spec on that too. I’ll take a talented lunatic with autonomy over 20 different voices in a bureaucratic community every time.

thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
And how many PCI-E cards do you think this comment took to reach my screen?
wallacoloo 5y ago
so your argument against consortiums (bluetooth) is that they work?… but at a higher cost (lengthy specs)? the historic alternative is a slightly lower cost (most of BT complexity is of the plumbing type, not the PhD type) and much more significant market risks (due to incompatibilities: smaller addressable market and less ability to pivot from one market to a different one). from the engineer PoV, i agree with you: i’d love for these specifications to be simplified. from the business PoV, i don’t think it actually matters that much.
Melatonic 5y ago
A consortium of nations interested in maintaining access to reliable compute and innovation might be interesting. As in not bought out explicitly but some kind of direct and regular investment

thrwyoilarticle 5y ago

That's how Arm already works! The customers help to set the roadmap. There's also prior art in RISC-V

01100011 5y ago
Is that a consortium? I work at a big tech company and our customers also request features of which we are the final arbiter. Does that make us a consortium?
- thrwyoilarticle 5y ago
  I inferred your argument as being that consortia are bad because of what they do (pet features), not what they are.
  - 01100011 5y ago
    Without a central arbiter who takes responsibility for producing a consistent and coherent design, you would likely end up with a mish mash of pet features. If a customer asks for a feature, you can say no if it is a bad choice. You have less leverage to do so when that 'customer' is really a paying member of a consortium.