野麦さん@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 1 year agoIntel rulelemmy.dbzer0.comimagemessage-square23linkfedilinkarrow-up1217arrow-down19
arrow-up1208arrow-down1imageIntel rulelemmy.dbzer0.com野麦さん@lemmy.dbzer0.com to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square23linkfedilink
minus-squareresipsaloquitur@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up18·1 year agoI’m all for open ISAs, but one of these can be licensed at reasonable rates and the other sued AMD for making the 64-but instruction set architecture that Intel should have made.
minus-squarePotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 year agohelp who’s who? there’s three mamufacturers in the meme and I’m woefully uninformed
minus-squareresipsaloquitur@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 year agoArm licenses ISAs and designs. It doesn’t manufacture anything.
minus-squarePotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agosorry, right. I still don’t know who sued AMD, I assume intel?
minus-squareDraconic NEO@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5arrow-down1·1 year agoIt was Intel. Stagnating CPU monopoly they are.
I’m all for open ISAs, but one of these can be licensed at reasonable rates and the other sued AMD for making the 64-but instruction set architecture that Intel should have made.
help who’s who? there’s three mamufacturers in the meme and I’m woefully uninformed
Arm licenses ISAs and designs. It doesn’t manufacture anything.
sorry, right. I still don’t know who sued AMD, I assume intel?
It was Intel. Stagnating CPU monopoly they are.