Imagine if x86-64 got blown open because of it? Might literally be the best thing to happen to computing in like 40 years.
Really fuckin’ doubt it’ll happen, but a girl can dream XP
Comment on Intel CPU Temperature Monitoring Driver For Linux Now Unmaintained After Layoffs
BD89@lemmy.sdf.org 4 weeks ago
When I got a new desktop PC this year I specifically avoided anything with Intel in it because of how bad they dropped the ball with their GPUs basically disintegrating.
This is just a small glimpse into how Intel is breaking down from the inside. It may take a few years but if the US government doesn’t intervene somehow on their behalf I truly think Intel might be done for in the next 5 years.
magic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
Eldritch@piefed.world 4 weeks ago
Or, what if it just became irrelevant. It's had a great run. But honestly ARM has shown plenty of versatility and power. While being licensable unlike x86. And things like riscv have similar of not better potential.
magic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 weeks ago
Its always going to be relevant, even only when emulated, simply because of how many code bases are stuck on x86/x86-64.
Open sourcing it and all of its extensions solves the licensing problems of not only itself, but Arm, while providing a battle tested architecture with decades of maturity.
Eldritch@piefed.world 4 weeks ago
Oh I have no issues with it being relevant in the same sense the Z80 68k or 6502 still being relevant. Just not part of a controlling duopoly.
BD89@lemmy.sdf.org 4 weeks ago
Thank you. Thank you for giving me hope lol
frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
The base x86-64 patents expired in 2021. Also, it was held by AMD, not Intel.
However, there are a lot of extensions that are still under patent. You can make an x86-64 processor the way it was when Opteron was released in 2003, but it won’t be competitive with current offerings. Those extensions are patented by a mix of both Intel and AMD. Intel failing isn’t going to fully open x86-64.
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
But if history is any indicator, they will. “Too big to fail!”
What’s crazy is, people will say “See how capitalism fails us?” when that is socialized capitalism. The government should not be bailing out any companies. If they can’t survive without government money, they don’t need to exist.
Mniot@programming.dev 4 weeks ago
socialized capitalism
I think I understand your complaint, but I’d say “free market” rather than “capitalism”. But regardless of what we call it, it doesn’t actually exist unless you have a more powerful external system regulating it.
Start with a truly free-market capitalist system. One company manages to temporarily pull ahead (through luck and skill). The rational thing for the company to do isn’t “make better products” (that’s hard) but “destroy competing companies” (much easier). And the end-product would be that the company becomes a government so it can force consumers to pay.
So I’d argue that socialized capitalism (which I’m picturing as a socialist system that permits certain specific free markets and handles the fallout of business failures) is what you actually want.
HiTekRedNek@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Not exactly. And larger companies simply CANT destroy competition without assistance from the government.
If you are free to choose what to buy, and who to buy it from, you can choose to buy from the startup. You can choose to buy from the guy running a business out of the back of his pickup. Or out of his garage. Or any number of options.
Problem is, right now we have our government enabling monopolies. Propping up failing, or non-profitable businesses by making it illegal to do business without spending millions or more on regulations that seem good on the surface, but when you start to dig into them, you see the vast majority of them were actually pushed by the big name businesses to stifle competition.
Our wallets should be the only regulation. Would you willingly buy products from a company that doesn’t respect the environment? No? Well guess what! That’s the power of the free market.
There’s, right now, a hybrid truck manufacturer in Canada that is right now staring down the barrel of excessive regulations that will limit their ability to build hybrid semi trucks.
How many other would-be entrepreneurs simply don’t even bother trying because there’s no way they can afford it?
How many small 1 to 2 person businesses would be in existence right now to compete with all these large companies?
Mniot@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
When I read your message, I get the impression that you think of “The Government” as this independent actor. I see it as a system that is primarily controlled by wealthy people. Either directly or through their funding advertisements (including astroturfing/bot-farms) to promote what they want.
So the larger companies do get government assistance… because they are the government. And this isn’t some kind of weird coincidence. It’s fundamental to capitalism’s operation. You can’t have a system that’s based on capital and then have it be unbiased towards entities who have vastly more capital!
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Arent their dGPU supposed to be pretty good?
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Same. Intel and Nvidia are both on the boycott list.
As great as AMD is right now, I still don’t want them to become a monopoly. The fact that we have a duopoly is already a major problem.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 weeks ago
Maybe we can dig up VIA and get a new Cyrix CPU.
Narauko@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It’s time for Voodoo to make a triumphant return!