so completely the opposite complaint than https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43762141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43762141 which said RISC-V people s

so completely the opposite complaint than https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43762141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43762141 which said RISC-V people should have skipped all the intermediate implementations and gone straight to x86-competitive competitive high performance cores. i.e. they're probably doing something right. When was the last successful and surviving today brand new ISA released that didn't offer backward compatibility with something that was already big in the market? Not Aarch64 -- it coexisted with 32 bit Arm in all of Arm's cores from 2012 until 2023. Not x86_64 which even to this days runs 32 bit (and 16 bit?) x86 code. MIPS and SPARC are both gone, Alpha and Itanium were never huge and anyway are gone. I guess IBM POWER, originally released as RS/6000 in 1990, 35 years ago. It had design lineage from 801/ROMP, but was not compatible with them.