this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
674 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

58839 readers
5016 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 87 points 21 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I'm hoping for a nice warm x86_64 phone.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 227 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

Hopefully Qualcomm takes the hint and takes this opportunity to develop a high performance RISC V core. Don't just give the extortionists more money, break free and use an open standard. Instruction sets shouldn't even require licensing to begin with if APIs aren't copyrightable. Why is it OK to make your own implentation of any software API (see Oracle vs. Google on the Java API, Wine implementing the Windows API, etc) but not OK to do the same thing with an instruction set (which is just a hardware API). Why is writing an ARM or x86 emulator fine but not making your own chip? Why are FPGA emulator systems legal if instruction sets are protected? It makes no sense.

The other acceptable outcome here is a Qualcomm vs. ARM lawsuit that sets a precedence that instruction sets are not protected. If they want to copyright their own cores and sell the core design fine, but Qualcomm is making their own in house designs here.

[–] [email protected] 53 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

takes this opportunity to develop a high performance RISC V core

They might. This would never be open sourced though. Best case scenario is the boost they would provide to the ISA as a whole by having a company as big as Qualcomm backing it.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 19 hours ago

RISC V is just an open standard set of instructions and their encodings. It is not expected nor required for implementations of RISC V to be open sourced, but if they do make a RISC V chip they don't have to pay anyone to have that privilege and the chip will be compatible with other RISC V chips because it is an open and standardized instruction set. That's the point. Qualcomm pays ARM to make their own chip designs that implement the ARM instruction set, they aren't paying for off the shelf ARM designs like most ARM chip companies do.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 19 hours ago

The RISCV instruction set IS open source. What they'd do to ratfuck it is lock the bootloader or something.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Simping for Qualcomm is definitely not a take i expected

[–] [email protected] 18 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

In the mobile Linux scene, Qualcomm chips are some of the best supported ones. I don't love everything Qualcomm does, but the Snapdragon 845 makes for a great Linux phone and has open source drivers for most of the stack (little thanks to Qualcomm themselves).

[–] [email protected] 13 points 17 hours ago

Qualcomm is one of the worst monopolists in any industry though. They are widely known to have a stranglehold on all mobile device development

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 166 points 1 day ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 151 points 1 day ago (13 children)

This will get RISC-V probably a big boost. Maybe this was not the smartest move for ARMs long term future. But slapping Qualcomm is always a good idea, its just such a shitty company.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

I wonder if their recent bid to take over Intel, is related.

The irony would be very thik as Qualcomm played a big role in killing Intel's 2010er efforts to enter the mobile sector.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

Qualcomm is not trying to take over Intel.

Not only has it been denied by both parties, it would 100% not go ahead. Additionally, it would invalidate the x86 cross-licence that AMD and Intel have, meaning Intel would no longer be able to make modern x86 CPUs. Frankly it's also somewhat doubtful Qualcomm wants to take Intel on.

The rumour was likely someone trying to pump up the stock and sell.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 day ago (3 children)

And so the corporate wars have begun

[–] [email protected] 27 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

I saw this documentary where taco bell won them.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›