Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

x86 life expectancy

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-08 23:28

for how long do you expect x86 to be the preferred architecture?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-11 13:00

>>39
The way they did it was, at least at the time.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-11 13:33

>>38
Unaligned loads and stores are still not innovative.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-11 13:34

>>42
Ignore me, I hadn't refreshed the page in a while

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-11 15:41

>>37
stops recognizing shit quality patents
Wait wait wait... China recognizes patents? With the amount of copy products coming out of that country you'd think they'd have violated at least one patent at some point.

Name: Cudder !MhMRSATORI!fR8duoqGZdD/iE5 2012-10-12 6:36

>>44
At least they're currently saying that they do, just to shut up the West.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 7:46

I always find these discussions intriguing, as ARM for example isn't responsible for any CPUs as far as I'm aware. PIC and TI sure seem to make a lot of microcontrollers and SoCs with their technology, but afaik there has yet to be a proper ARM ``desktop'' processor. Are there such devices in production?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 12:27

>>37
Any news on the new Lemote laptop?

Also, it would be cool if someone reverse engineered a ``large'' (over 100,000 LUTs) FPGA and (finally) produced a FOSS toolchain so that paranoid people like me can just make their own ICs with no fear of hardware backdoors as unlikely and easy to detect as they may be.  I would totally write a Lisp machine.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 12:31

>>46
They started out making workstation CPUs, but I don't think anyone is dumb enough to try competing with Intel on the desktop. There's a few companies trying to make server CPUs, but they're after low power, not performance.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 12:33

>>48
I don't think anyone is dumb enough to try competing with Intel on the desktop.
What about Advanced Micro Devices?

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 12:47

>>49
Doing great.

Name: Anonymous 2012-10-15 13:19

>>49
The company in Intel's cross-licensing cartel? Do you really think they're competition and not just a company Intel throws a bone to every once and a while to keep the DoJ off their back?

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List