this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
742 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59402 readers
3756 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 241 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (18 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.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (7 children)

Don't just give the extortionists more money

Or maybe they were just trying to pay a lot less money, and then they got caught at their little trick.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 35 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Do you know how much money you have to pay to make a RISC V chip? Even less than that, since it's free

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If it's that's easy / cheap then why have they not?

This is a big ol' game of bluff from both sides. So, according to you, Qualcomm should call their bluff?

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They would need a new core design

[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 2 points 3 weeks ago

Wonder how long that'd take, hmm?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)