I'm sure there are other companies/corporations like IBM, HP, and Qualcomm who have the expertise and resources to make their own x86 processors. So why don't they make them? Because having only two options is really bad for us. I would personally like to have at least 5 choices.
via makes x86....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_x86_manufacturers
alot of companies did but they just couldn't keep up. Its like the stock market everything you see (most of the time) is those companies that have made it though the years. Those that don't die and disappear.
Well and intel wouldn't just give out the licence.
what Hadesfriend said
Also at this point it isn't really that interesting anymore to enter the market for x86 processors: most server-farms are going to move to specialized risk designs (some have already, google is currently transitioning some of their infrastructure ). Consumer computers & workstations are probably going to end up having some sort of hybrid of Arm & X86 combined with gpu compute cores. The x86 cores are likely going to be treated as some sort of special instruction set for certain tasks.
Since we’re going to be stuck with Silicon for 1-2 decades without getting really big performance bumps: my guess is that we are going to see an ever growing number of specialized cores & instruction sets being added. (more optimization rather then more transistors)
It is going to be ever easier to lock down these markets with patents and the special software licences that solely can use the task optimized cores.
I hope that Linux and Free-software takes over soon, or else we're going to see things like intel processors with adobe-creative-cores. It will be amazingly fast for the few people that can afford it. Say hello to pervasive hardware-enabled software drm.
political rant
It looks especially dark since "the west" is now entering the phase of capitalism where the corporations capture the governments. Which means we loose all leverage & will likely be stuck with current level of compute performance until capitalism eats itself & makes room for social change. Or the capital owners overcome their predatory nature and stabilize the system into a totalitarian police state, at which point a tiny minority will try to prevent further democratization of all technological progress.
Basically blame the governor l government for the ridiculous patent laws which keep competition out in fast moving I industries. Basically every new and current product is based on older technology, but the it sector moves so fast and patent law is at bad that all the vl stuff is protected by government monopolies.
Also fluffies views are unnecessarily black, AMD had problems which combined with fabrication problems and declining PC sales which culminated in the situation we had today. Now it looks like we are getting back on track.
Oh and is the other way around, politicians make final economic business decisions, businesses just rent that say to consolidated their positions.
fluffies views are unnecessarily black, AMD had problems which combined ARM & x86 fabrication process and declining PC sales which culminated in the situation we had today. Now it looks like we are getting back on track.
What is "the track" we're getting back on. I genuinely don't understand what you are referring to, I really would like to have my views lightened.
Oh and is the other way around, politicians make final economic business decisions, businesses just rent that say to consolidated their positions.
So capitalism enabled feudalism ? ... ism-inception -> you just melted my brain
I want Distributionism (minus the religious undertones) like the git system on linux, how do we get there ?