>which does not seem like a smart decision now (especially as Qualcomm seems to be moving to RISC-V lol).
I politely disagree. We know for a fact, from December's RISC-V Summit, that Microsoft is influencing RISC-V to ease the burden on their own Windows for RISC-V effort.
Qualcomm was a partner for ARM, and they are already used to working with them. They will likely be partners again, with RISC-V devices this time around.
And Windows for ARM will go the same way as Windows for Alpha. Just an historical footnote.
Why? Some people here seem to be weirdly obsessed with RISC-V when it's likely to end up being even more closed/proprietary than ARM (at least on the high-end). Why would you give away your competitive advantage to everyone else by licensing your core designs?
ARM at least provides more or less an even playing field to everyone. It's much cheaper for competitors to catch-up with Gravitron since they can just license the exactly same core it's built on. If it was a RISC-V CPU and as much ahead it would be way easier for AWS to maintain it's moat.
I politely disagree. We know for a fact, from December's RISC-V Summit, that Microsoft is influencing RISC-V to ease the burden on their own Windows for RISC-V effort.
Qualcomm was a partner for ARM, and they are already used to working with them. They will likely be partners again, with RISC-V devices this time around.
And Windows for ARM will go the same way as Windows for Alpha. Just an historical footnote.
RISC-V is inevitable.