Hacker News Reader

Comment by mhh__ | Hacker News Reader

The only companies I can think of that could really make it would probably be Apple (because they have an iron grip over that platform) or Intel (because they actually have good software unlike almost all of their competitors, which could make the migration easier) - Apple are happy with ARM and Intel are probably terrified after what happened with Itanium. Any move to RISC-V will probably either happen in China or incrementally.

View on HN

I once read on HN that Apple gets ARM ISA and designs for free by virtue of being a founder. So the closed proprietary nature isn't enough for them to move to RISC V.

I'm not sure that's true though..

They probably have a very generous, very old contract by virtue of being the first third-party to use ARM in a device. But we won't know the specifics unless there's a court case that touches that relationship.

With the way Apple operates, we have ten years before we can reasonably assume that they would change their architecture. Is RISC-V really going to be worth all the headaches of a transition in ten years?

As previous posters have pointed out, Apple is not a third party.

"The company was founded in November 1990 as Advanced RISC Machines Ltd and structured as a joint venture between Acorn Computers, Apple Computer (now Apple Inc.) and VLSI Technology."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arm_Ltd.#Founding

More details about ARM licensing:

"Finally at the top of the pyramid is an ARM architecture license. Marvell, Apple and Qualcomm are some examples of the 15 companies that have this license."

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7112/the-arm-diaries-part-1-h...

>I once read on HN that Apple gets ARM ISA and designs for free by virtue of being a founder.

I can bet $100 on it being wrong. Especially the ARMv8 ( and v9 )

Why is it that treating collective nouns (e.g. Apple) as plural has a tendency to trigger an irrational negative emotional response for me? What's even weirder is that I used to think that made more sense and used it too, until convention in American society changed my thinking to flip to singular.

The English-language grammar concerning pronouns and subject-verb agreement is something that shows a lot of regional variation. In the variety I grew up speaking, whether you use the singular or plural depends on both the part of speech of the word you're inflecting, and the specific collective noun you're trying to agree with. It's a complicated enough set of conventions that I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone who didn't grow up in the same region as me to be able to follow them precisely.

Long story short, it's probably not terribly utilitarian to have strong opinions about the subject when participating in an international forum such as this one.

Valid point, I will try practicing it with the aim of accepting both variations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com