3 ms·
Considering it takes years to design a CPU I don't think it would be worth it. The point of software is that you can change it quickly and so it evolves faster
by boyter 15y ago
Considering it takes years to design a CPU I don't think it would be worth it. The point of software is that you can change it quickly and so it evolves faster then the hardware that runs it.
IMO that's an advantage that easily overcomes any instability that new software brings.
That said there was an interesting article/interview (cant find it sorry maybe someone else can) with one of the creators of hotmail. Off the top of my head he said that because he came from the hardware side when creating the hotmail software it never broke due to the processes and practices he followed. Perhaps there is a middle ground that we can take and get benefits all around.
- etrain 15y agoOn the other hand, you've got FPGAs, which bring the software stuff to the hardware guys - and based on my (limited) understanding of the hardware industry, they've improved certain prototyping exercises by an order of magnitude. Agreed that the rapid development cycles and malleability of the product is part of what's made software great - but my feeling is that maybe we've let that slip a little too much - leading to the bloated, slow, buggy software that everyone runs all the time.