3 ms·
Apple and Qualcomm _have_ to use Arm ISA because they don't have x86 license. Apple would have likely stayed on x86 if they could use it in their in-house desig
by lII1lIlI11ll 1y ago
Apple and Qualcomm _have_ to use Arm ISA because they don't have x86 license. Apple would have likely stayed on x86 if they could use it in their in-house designs. Intel wouldn't issue x86 license to Qualcomm or Apple, of course.
- LeFantome 1y agoIf Intel would have licensed x86 for use in Apple’s own finished computers, Intel would be in a way better position. Foolish not just to lose that customer but also to legitimize ARM as a desktop and high-end option. I think Apple would have switched anyway though. They designed Apple Silicon for their mobile devices first (iPhone, iPad) which I doubt they would have made x86. The laptops and desktops are the same ISA as the iPhone (strategically).
- rangestransform 1y agoThere was a rumour on here that aarch64 was actually designed by Apple and given to ARM to standardize
- klelatti 1y agoIt’s a false rumour. Arm has decades of ISA design experience and their chief architect has talked about designing Aarch64. Sure they Apple and Arm worked together but it wasn’t developed by Apple and given to Arm.
- klelatti 1y agoVery unlikely. Moving to Arm allowed Apple to have a single architecture across all their hardware and leverage iPhone designs as the starting point for Mac SoCs.
- Dylan16807 1y agoIt was more compelling when M1 came out, but these days, even accepting every possible x86-related patent as valid, everything pre-AVX should expire by 2026. So no license needed.