> As for portable specs, if Open Group, Khronos have taught anything, is that there is a big difference between paper and real hardware/platforms.
But… they don't even specify ISAs, they specify APIs. I'd wager the big difference is only natural. Another way would be for a vendor to design their ISA on their own, then make it public. If a public ISA gives them an advantage (and I think it could), others would be forced to follow suit. No more unrealistic consortium. :-)
> faulty undocumented firmware bugs
I hope that today, any hardware bug would trigger an expensive recall, and firmware bugs would just be embarrassing. CPUs today do have bugs, but not that many. We could generalise that to the rest of the hardware.
But… they don't even specify ISAs, they specify APIs. I'd wager the big difference is only natural. Another way would be for a vendor to design their ISA on their own, then make it public. If a public ISA gives them an advantage (and I think it could), others would be forced to follow suit. No more unrealistic consortium. :-)
> faulty undocumented firmware bugs
I hope that today, any hardware bug would trigger an expensive recall, and firmware bugs would just be embarrassing. CPUs today do have bugs, but not that many. We could generalise that to the rest of the hardware.