This is maddingly frustrating. I *really* wanted an ARM processor for software development that could compete with Apple silicon and maybe even x86. Nuvia seemed to be leading to this. ARM is squandering an opportunity. This reminds me of AT&T and BSD
Burning through venture capital to develope and improve the ARM technology is not a sustainable business model. As we see with ARM, the VCs might get bored with spending a lot of money without much - if any - of a return. Qualcom wants to pay as little as possible to ARM and buys a startup to get the IP they need cheaper than negotiating the licenses with ARM and any third party involved so they then can sell their chips to OEMs and make them pay for licenses. Good for Qualcom :D ARM on the other hand wants to earn as much money as possible so the VCs and other shareholders get their RoI and have enough left to improve so they stay competitive. Good for ARM :D Not too long ago, maybe 10 or 15 years, we expected new and exiting hardware out of China based on MIPS and/or OpenSPARC. Turns out IP alone does not make a chip, you need more than that. That's where ARMS support for developers comes in and this support has to be payed for , too.
I think that it is there. You just need to assemble your system. Gigabyte has a dual core motherboard for Amphere processors. You put two 128 core Amphere Altra Max CPUs into the board. Plug a PCIe graphic display card. Plug another PCIe SSD. Plug 16 pieces of DIMM may be 512G RAM. No Apple silicon can match your development machine. You can have it in a 2U setup.
Great breakdown of the case. I was waiting for RISC-V to be mentioned at the end. If anything this might push future chip startups to lean in that direction. If ARM wins, the Nuvia purchase would most likely have a negative impact on any future startup looking to do something similar to Nuvia. At least with RISC-V there's a much higher chance of being aquired if they can help a chip maker be less reliant on ARM.
Probably not. RISC-V is so modular to the extent that binaries are no longer portable between different chips because they each support slightly different subsets of the RISC-V ISA. The ARM CEO mentioned this himself in an interview IIRC.
From what I heard, one of the issues with RISC-V is that while the architecture is open, alot of the extensions are closed source (or paid, one of those)
@@albertsun3393 everything that linux or other OSes needs are open Simd and visualization extensions open too. So, everything that are mature and needed by most users eventually will be turned into standard extension. For experimental staff riscv has a lot of places(instruction encodings, mmu types, internal interrupt numbers) that marked "for vendor use" Main goal of riscv is to give vendors linux capable system that they can add problem specific parts(instructions, interrupts...)
Arm this is brilliant, this is exactly what we need to get everyone to move to the open source RISC-V architecture. This is essentially AT&T vs BSD Unix all over again... hold my beer, I'm going to make some popcorn. 🍿
RISC-V is not open *source*, "just" open *specifications*. You'd still need cores, of which many are closed, and many come with royalties and licenses again. It's a slippery slope. :)
@@CyReVolt The patients for the original PowerPC architecture are already starting to expire, and whatever is still patient encumbered the OpenPOWER Foundation is trying to make available, for instance there are already two reference Power ISA v3.0 softcore implementations that are entirely open source, Libre-SOC and Microwatt. Nvidia and Mellanox are both founding members of the OpenPOWER Foundation, and since Nvidia was denied the ability to purchase Arm you can bet that they are going to double down on evangelizing the Power ISA. The OpenPOWER Foundation is now actually organized under the Linux Foundation. The goal is to create a new open platform akin to the original IBM compatible PC after Compaq reverse engineered IBM's BIOS. Both RISC-V and OpenPOWER are little endian RISC implementations with objectives that almost entirely overlap, so these two project need to come together to facilitate these shared common goals.
I would put it this way: Arm PC is a Competitor to X86 AND keeps PC competitiv against (Arm)Mac so actually this lawsuit foremost is beneficial for Apple by delaying the maturity of serious ARM Desktop PCs, right? Can't help but have the feeling that ARM is burrying itself with this... smells like adobe, Nintendo, OneWheel, BMW,.... "the old business models are more and more failing but this anti consumer-behavior is doomed to collapse hard and ugly..." nostradamos ;)
I am kind of against ARM entering the PC market, especially desktops given that their SOC design limits upgradeability and repairability. But on thin & light laptops it can be quite beneficial especially for battery life.
And nothing of value is lost, instead the market might be forced to embrace RISC-V rather than ARM. And RISC-V follows a somewhat similar simple instructions approach but it an "open standard instruction set architecture" so companies can do whatever they want to do with it (and have been doing so already). It was starting to get competitive with ARM already, getting more resources behind it because ARM is digging its own grave just means faster progression for RISC-V.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat more than that, having no BIOS GUI (except some rare implementations of UEFI or petitboot) is extremely detrimental for many PC users as they will have to enter the deep water of U-boot just to change some boot options. Having to play with device trees and having to maintain images for every single implementation of the same SOC is a lot of support work and that's one of the reason why a lot of devboards from the past decade turned to be quickly unusable (or unsafe to use) even with FOS operating systems.
I wouldn't hold my breath for arm pc/laptop. Not having standardized platform, means continued mess with bootloaders per device, firmware per device, and lack of open drivers, and a pile of e-waste no one supports because it is not making money.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat ARM is strictly an IP company. They're not entering any market. It's up to the companies that license the ARM architecture to create processors what they do with them.
Great video with a unique inside view of how ARM's IP business works! Don't most, if not all, IP agreements contain very specific wording on what happens when a licensee gets acquired?
If they can pull off good performance and power efficiency, RISC-V chips could become "the new ARM" in the end, in being the most-used chip solution, which would be great! =D
@@greecemobile7610 For now. There's a bunch of money getting poured into RISC-V right now, but it's not at the same level that, say, Intel, Apple, and AMD spend on their chip architecture RND. Honestly, I think that what it will take is for one of the big players to get burned by ARM badly enough to start pumping some serious fuck you money and resources into RISC-V to try and use it as a viable alternative architecture for _something_ at a large scale.
Now here's my question: what *exactly* does the Qualcomm ALA say? Specifically, does it say "code must be Qualcomm IP only" or "invalid in the event of a merger or acquisition" or anything to that effect?
I haven't read the brief, but it seems like ARM simply want to force Qualcomm to renegotiate. The fact that they're continuing to support them (and that this is "orthogonal to the case") hints at this, although their support may be contractually obliged. I can imagine they had a chat beforehand and said "Look, sorry fellas but we need to sue you so we can get a bit more money out of this deal you've pivoted on." I expect Qualcomm will renegotiate for something costing somewhere between Nuvia's agreement and their own current agreement(s). Basically, it seems like a strong-arm negotiation tactic. (No pun intended!)
Qualcomm is so stupid. They had a World Class CPU Design team... That was beating ARM designs for years.. But all got fired after their Server CPU didn't sell... Now they spend Billions on Nuvia and possibly can release nothing 😅
So the TLDR is Qualcomm didn't get the appropriate license that covered everything what Nuvia dose before merging the two companies, and now trying to use their own incomplete license which had lower royalty rate on Nuvia's design. Of course ARM will sue them, especially now ARM are starved of cash after acquisition deal with NVIDIA was killed partially due to opposition from Qualcomm.
Год назад
Wait a minute! this background looks familiar, are you guys collaborating with Patrick?
Windows doesn’t have a place where to put libraries so it’s actually not there fault and if your emu can’t deal with different paths you should reach reconsider how you designed it.
I don't understand why the FTC doesn't step in at least within any division of ARM based in America... They are a monopoly on reduced instruction sets with the only alternative being RISC-V.
@@kevikiru usually after a lawsuit is filed, both parties are more inclined to reach a settlement. Both have things to lose if the lawsuit will follow all the way through.
Is this your new studio? Looks nice! :) Ah, it's Patrick's... Anyway, thank you for the in-depth explanation. Doesn't this cause any problems for an ongoing lawsuit?
I'd be concerned that Arm's behaviour might be anti-competitive as well. Are they essentially saying that they can decide that Qualcomm cannot sell this kind of product. It shouldn't have got to court, ultimately it's going to hurt Arm and push more companies towards RISC-V (in the longer term). Either way, the IP should not be destroyed, human effort shouldn't be wasted in that way just because Arm has a bad take.
This is such a rookie M&A mistake, I'm almost shocked. Almost because I've seen this level of legal incompetence a couple times at major tech firms in the last couple years. I'd love to know if this was Arm's in house council or outside council that 'oofed'. It's not even legal's fault as this kind of thing is covered in most MBA/CFA programs.
To those engineer and creative individual, it must have been a headache. Their hard work become investor property and they only received a monthly salary + they are subject to be fired(but they contributed more than the investor). Arm will never invent since they play this royalties business scheme and if they did, 10 years already passed and we still looking at an arm architecture with a miniscule improvement instead of inventing new way, just like INTEL.
I am a professional digital IC Designer that has worked for the likes of e.g. Intel, and when it comes to companies you do not wish to work with, it's exactly 2 names: Qualcomm and ARM. Besides the fact that I think that ARM IP isn't even that great (the RTL code does not impress me much tbh), their licensing ideas become more and more ridiculous. Qualcomm on the other hand by now is seemingly more a law firm than a chip company, which is a shame. Because their silicon is usually pretty advanced and great, but the way Qualcomm treats basically anyone outside of their own walls is a 100% model of how NOT do do it. I seriously hope RISC-V rises to a point where ARM becomes worthless or at least so pressured that they come back to earth with what they are demanding. They are trying to milk this instruction set to the limit, but frankly, competation is on the rise. So especially alianating your architecture license customers like that will backfire big time. It just takes Qualcomm, Apple or even Intel/AMD to really embrace RISC-V and ARM is dead. And being an extendable RISC-architecture, it is really mostly about re-engineering the decoder. Many intstructions are similar enough to turn a very efficient ARM design into a RISC-V design.
The thing about poisoning the well is that ARM is suing on of its customers which is generally a bad thing even if there are legal reasons for doing so in this case. I do think this move was a to force a negotiating position but such business deals are always best behind closed doors as the ugliness of arguments is kept from the public eye. I would argue that the worst case and something will likely happen to some degree going forward is a modification of how ARM licenses its IP. Worst case is that ARM stops offering new ALA agreements and increases pricing on their TLA agreements. The other wild card in this disagreement is that ARM too was attempting to be acquired by nVidia. Discovery in the ARM vs. Qualcomm disagreement has the potential to reach into various documents exchanged between ARM and nVidia as part of their failed transaction.
I read what legal filings that are on line. Nowhere did ARM state in their deal with Nuvia that if Nuvia is acquired that the deal they made with ARM is off. Both sides have weaknesses in their cases. Destroying 3 years of development is not going to happen. The Judge will send it to mediation and eventually Qualcomm will give ARM some money to go away.
Companies using arm were already looking at risc V. This surely only serves to accelerate that effort in all companies. No surprise sifive are sponsoring, they must be on an upswing for every arm lawsuit
Sounds like ARM just wants to double dip. Regardless of the outcome this absolutely poisons the well. It shows no matter how much work gets done on top of ARM's IP that ARM still views it as theirs and they'll reneg whenever they want once your work becomes more valuable than it was when previously negotiated. That's like selling your house to a 2nd party then suing a 3rd party when they rebuy that house for a higher price after the 2nd party put a bunch of work into it. Arm's been spending too much time with Apple and wants their cut every step down the line.
What's this news that Charlie from SemiAnalysis is hinting at ? Behind a paywall it is unfortunately but seemingly it's hinted that Qualcomm just shut down Nuvia ?? Is that true ?
When VIA purchased Cyrix and Centaurthey were allowed to make x86 chips because of Cyrix's and Centaurs preexisting rights. AFAIK Intel didn't make them sign a new agreement.
3:00 5x gains, yeah, nobody is gonna allow them to disrupt current market that much. thats gonna be a hard fight to win. ps we live in the world where 5-15% "gains" in performance per year made "the norm" by tech giants, to milk the market and spend as low as possible on R&D. slow progress = less price drop on old products = bigger margins = more profits. fast progress is very bad for business of milking people's wallets.
Dennard scaling ended years ago, new processes cost far more to develop and only logic scales now, not cache memory or io, while higher frequency with power efficiency needs smart design. No need for conspiracy theories, in the past most performance gains came from process improvement.
@@RobBCactive thats not a conspiracy theory. Lets take Nvidya/AMooDe. Nvidya makes GaaS = wants PC gaming dead. AMooDe makes PS5-Xbox = wants PC gaming dead. result? = overpriced af GPUs = PC gaming essentially IS dead at this point, nobody can afford current gen gaming, so game devs make games for obsolete hardware. AMooDe has Vcache tech to kill Intel yet chose to release 7000 CPUs overpriced aaaand without 3D Vcache to not compete much and to not drop prices much on older CPUs it still makes. with GPU prices we all are familiar. + a Steam Deck exists with old AMooDe tech running AAA games for less then 600 bucks, meanwhile smartphone SoCs can run only 10 y.o. graphics and stupid people are still buying that morally obsolete crap for 1000 bucks+. Now imagine a Steam Deck with latest AMD hardware, Zen4, 3D Vcache, RDNA3, all that tech already exists and the only reason we don't see it is such a device would literally kill ps5/xbox market, which is a market AMooDe sells its chips to. And imagine it in a smartphone form factor. it would kill everything on a smartphone market. AAA gaming instead of 10 y.o. morally obsolete crap in a pocket. it also would severely damage the PC market because why buy PCs if you can have everything in your pocket. in 1 device. no need for gaming PCs unless they start to offer truly next-gen 5x performance + photorealistic graphics - all of that. That is what AMooDe sits on pretty much right now. And thats facts, not a a conspiracy theory.
@@rawdez_.... Valve is building a steam deck 2 with amd's new apu design Hell amd has been building up the dragon range series of apus with explicit intention of making power efficient low cost gaming (extremely good gpu systems) And you do realise that ps5 and xbox consoles are usually sold at cost or a loss and are made up through game sales? They will always cost less than a pc due to there being less focused on upfront profit Not to mention gpu crisis was almost entirely due to the mining boom - 4080 just failed in it's launch to the point Nvidia is considering a price cut for it. If anything amd is bending over backwards in every market to gain market share - and yes they make far more selling to servers and pc crowd than consoles because of the bulk agreements You also forgot intel in there - why are they with holding their tech if it's all a conspiracy? They literally can't profit off console gaming
@@rawdez_this is literally one of the wildest theories i have heard till late I would rather believe gpu crisis would be because of nvidia and amd playing the market for everything it's worth (which while isn't intentional but what's happened) You really have to re think this lad
@@aravindpallippara1577 >Valve is building we need smartphone makers building smartphones with AMD tech, not Valve building another gaming device (which is cool but not gonna help much by itself). Unless Valve make it in a smartphone form factor (e.g. with detachable controls) + with phone functionality and release it in 2023. also I really doubt AMD would allow anyone use all what they have - 3d-vcache and RDNA3 in a not heavily cut-down version just because they can't allow something better than a ps5/xbox on the market. >crisis was almost entirely due to the mining boom you look so big yet still believe in marketing fairy tales when in fact AMD/NVIDIA were way too happy to make billions on that. who are really to blame miners or those who sold overpriced pickaxes and didn't want to drop prices when mining has died? >forgot intel in there - why are they with holding their tech what tech? they get to keep selling their overheating overpriced CPUs and slow overpriced GPUs with bad drivers, lol. ps at this point we need Qualcomm and their 5x perf-per-watt improvement but with RDNA3-level or better graphics. Adreno is a trash-level GPUs. and with a price tag thats not even close to 1000 bucks but way lower. now THAT would be a real progress.
Sounds like ARM is just mad because of the losses from not selling Nuvia chips. All those sales will be absorbed into Qualcomm chips but it's not like ARM developed those chips. I'm not sure why they'd ever have control over research that a company that had a license with them did. It comes across as greedy on ARM's side and they should be worried about Qualcomm succeeding and all ARM CPU manufacturers/designers. The better all of those companies do, the better for ARM.
Not that I am a fan of defending ARM, but with Nuvia's Licensing Model, didn't ARM also dedicate in house Engineering resources directly to Nuvia during it's development process ? essentially giving ARM something more than just a licensing interest in Nuvia's technology ? I recall Garry-Explains mentioning THAT and me arguing with him about acquisitions etc..lol
Arm contributed FAEs required to assist with the project. That's standard for any IP/OEM relationship, nothing new on that front. Anyone who suggests otherwise isn't familiar with the situation at all.
I do wonder if Softbank will kill ARM. If their architecture/IP is so expensive and complex to maintain perhaps it is cheaper in the long term to think outside the box and evolve the open source RISC-V architecture. If ARM is laying off its staff then they are dying anyway. If not that it ultimately may be cheaper for Qualcom to buy ARM then negotiate with it. Benjamins speak to Softbank and if the economy goes south they may need the $'s.
I’d like to see laptop battery life compromised for battery longevity, by using LiFePO4 cells instead of NMC Li-ion cells. But nobody would actually make such a laptop would they?
So TL:DR, ARM has decided that it doesn't matter how many times they are paid for the right to use their product, it's not enough, and any company with any other option at all should look at literally any other future partner.
ARM is not doing themselves a favor here. RISC-V is just around the corner. All the chinese companies are already pushing for RISC-V and they will eventually win. It's just a matter of time. And now ARM is basically saying here: Well, if you work with us, you may get into all this trouble. When I would design a new IC and look at that. I would directly go with RISC-V, even if that means more investments right now. It's going to pay off in mid/long term.
I keep flip-flopping to see if ARM or Qualcomm are more in the wrong about this. Definitely can't decide just yet... The ARM argument feels like trying to pull the coin out of the vending machine and the Qualcomm argument feels like trying to cover for lack of due diligence. I could see the judge awarding token damages to ARM and a finger wag to Qualcomm to triple-check their M&A stuff. Destroying the whole Nuvia core design seems really rough - like, to the point where other ARM licensees are going to start wondering if they actually own their designs or not.
Sound like Arm wants to double charge Qualcomm for something it was already remitted for. Does the IP work like a lease or a purchase. As an asset can the IP be depreciated year to year. Could a royal agreement per intent conversion be open market valued, or are they seeking monopoly over the market futures -- a catch 22 got-cha.
How can it be legal for ARM to ask for destruction of all Nuvia IP after Qualcomm has bought it. The market value of Nuvia is their IP, since Nuvia has nothing else. It is like ARM asking Qualcomm to burn all the money they have invested, by destroying the market value of Nuvia after the buyout. Essentially destroying part of the Qualcomm market value. That should be illegal. If ARM succeeds here it would be a really bad precedent. The market value of companies could not be evaluated easily anymore. Since it would essentially be dictated at will by the companies that have licensed something to the company in question. Like if I am producing x86 mobile chips and buy AMD and Intel tells me that I am not allowed to produce x86 chips for mobile phones based on AMD Server IP and I should destroy all IP that AMD developed. I instantly go broke together with AMD, since I bought them to make better x86 mobile chips. And all investors in AMD lose their investment as well. Somebody needs to step onto ARM and give them a big slap on the face. They want to give preferential treatment for licensing but that should also be illegal. If the license covers something when Nuvia is the licensee, then anybody else should have the same license if they acquire Nuvia and whatever they are already licensing should be allowed to be improved from the Nuvia IP. If the license does no cover something then a renegotiation is fine, but not asking to "destroy all IP related". That would be legal bullying. They clearly have a money agenda behind it to go so strongly, by expecting a big pile of cash in settlement. ARM are becoming a bunch of patent trolls. And for the part where they supported Nuvia... they got already paid for that. If they made a good support deal for Nuvia but they now want more because the IP went to Qualcomm... that's not how it works. Preferential treatment for one company has no bearing on the future owner. Nobody want to work with patent trolls, and this will hurt ARM much more than the loss of the potential money they could have achieved. Hopefully RISC-V matures quickly and ARM goes the way of the Dodo.
I'm really sorry but you cannot start this story in the present day. ARM has had a history of problems with Qualcomm stemming back a decade. You've created a narrative with this video that is quite far off from the actual historical thread by assuming people understood the backstory. Your comment section has demonstrated that this is not even close to the case.
@Lashiv b I had a reply in a longer thread that looks like it got moderated out, but basically, there is no reason for ARM to treat Qualcomm like a friend after the years of Qualcomm pushing out every other ARM partner over baseband IP.
Every time anyone was close to producing a non x86 chip that could emulate x86 better than the real thing... they received the "judicial system" at their door and the project was over...
I was SHOCKED at the state of the "office" package..... I used it for like 10+ years for school and home use..... But NOW, it's this whole cloud-nightmare.... You have to SIGN IN, with a password! GROTESQUE! That's the future for you..... Logging in to your typewriter, and paying it a subscription fee...... I'm a programmer, and I'm not even 40, but I swear, I feel like an old man, and all you young people are trampling everything I ever liked.
I think he lost or appealed. He'll probably pay a few millions to Apple but he got 100s of millions from the Qualcomm deal so all in all he won. Btw he didn't steal any apple designs, since there are patents. However he was working on a server CPU as his own project however you're not allowed to do that when working for Apple. So what he did was "illegal" but he didn't do Apple any harm.
Hopefully ARM loses their natural monopoly position soon. In general the chip industry needs more competition, but it's difficult when most high performance parts stem from ASML, TSMC, Samsung and Intel
@@gatocochino5594Thanks, but no major problems were found. Just curious, why are you shifting the burden of proof to Qcomm though? It is usually the plaintiff that has to make his case. I am not deeply familiar with all the details in question, so there could be some sort of agreement that co-developed IP could need ARM's sign-off and a mandatory re-negotiation of the licensing fees, but on the other hand, if only a small part of the overall design is not covered by Qcomm's superset of their own ALA, it should not be blocking the whole project IMHO, only the part up in question should be subject to a FRAND-license if there is no other mechanism in place. But I guess none of the contracts have such a mechanism in place to deal with co-developed IP in the event of a take-over. At least that's what my gut tells me. I suspect ARM simply had not anticipated that the co-developed IP could end up in the hands of a wealthier SOC customer and they now try to squeeze out more money. Regardless of the legal outcome that could backfire in the end as more of their customer's could shift their focus on RISC-V now where this whole legal battleground would not exist.
@@seylaw ''Just curious, why are you shifting the burden of proof to Qcomm though?'' Because Qcomm refused to renegotiate its licensing agreements with Arm despite Arm telling Qcomm that they had to if Qcomm wanted to use Nuvia's IP, it's pretty clear that Qcomm wants this to go to court. And considering everything Qcomm has done in the last few years it seems that Qcomm wants to cripple Arm financially so that only they(and technically Apple, but that's indirect competition) have high performance consumer Arm cores.
@@gatocochino5594 But Apple and Qcomm both need ARM as long as they want to use their ISA. While their own custom cores might compete with high-performance ARM designs in the same market, they also could just use these instead of developing their own custom cores, saving on manpower and time-to-market. But they chose to create their own designs for full control as they were not satisfied with ARM's off-the-shelf offerings and wanted a better core for market differentiation purposes. Its not that they intentionally want ARM to be weak though. they don't have control over ARMs own development which is also driven by the needs of many other SOC vendors. What's true is, that with their own CPU teams, they have to invest heavily to actually achieve something significantly better. Sometimes companies fail to achieve better results though, that's why some SOC vendors canceled their custom core divisions in the past and went back to the standard cores.
I hope the parties involved settle this. Because m1 has shown that arm can challenge x86’s dominance in the market place. I feel like this is an episode of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Like arm might have technological merit, but is it worth any business investment in an existing or startup arm vendor? you don’t want to get to the point where the technology is good, but arm the corporate entity is toxic waste to deal with. I don’t want to see Qualcomm cut off either and lose its license because it’s doing good things in the smartphone space especially with the upcoming snapdragon 8 gen2. I hope they work this out and get back on track and offer strong competition against apple in smartphones as well as x86 in laptop and desktop.
Don't understand all nuances, but to me it seems, the IP should be owned by Nuvia, any company should be able to come along negotiate the ALA licence from ARM and apply the Nuvia IP that they paid for on top the ALA licence, ARM didn't develop the IP, they should have no say in the matter. That's no different to a me taking buying an ALA licence from ARM, hiring all the Nuvia engineers and through paying these engineeers salary (equivalent expenditure to buying Nuvia) over several years building the IP. ARM is being nasty and I hope they lose.
Nuvia doesn't exist anymore. Qualcomm could have run Nuvia as a seperate entity and folowed the Nuvia ALA for server chips. However it was gutted and merged the company assets, effectively a transfer. And the Nuvia ALA is alledged to be written in such a way to require renogotiation with ARM before any transfer can occur. Qualcomm says they tried to negotiate in good faith, but ARM failed to do so, Further they already have an ALA so it shouldn't really matter where the design comes from. Most likely result... another 12-18 months of court filing sand a quiet negotiation with Qualcomm to modify the ALA to giver ARM higher royalties and server chips and slightly higher royalites on PC chips.
I really hope this kind of shenanigans elevates RISC-V to the forefront and slowly pushes other architectures out. Proprietary and closed-source should be a thing of the past - both for software and, hopefully, for hardware as well.
It not big issue it's only licensing issue and soon this issue solve by Qualcomm and Arm. Oryon already production phase. Qualcomm Oryon processor come in 2023.
Here's how I see it: Very smart guys design M1 ARM which is hugely successful/profitable for Apple --> Guys leave Apple to found Nuvia and make ARM server CPU ---> Qualcomm buy Nuvia, not because interested in server space but because interested in competing with Apple M1 for high efficiency mobile devices ---> Apple drops heavy handed hints to ARM citing license infringement in order to scupper competition. I only see Apple and a Golgafrincham Ark B ship load of lawyers actually benefiting from protracted legal squabbling - conversely if ARM licensed Qualcomm to design and make chips that could compete in terms of power and efficiency with M1/M2 then Apple are the biggest loser.
Arm are being stupid. There needs to be a PC ARM chip that's performant. Arm is destroying investment in arm architecture. Who elsenis going to want to invest in creating new architecture if this is the way they act.
humans work together sometimes. whenever money isn't involved. one example that comes to mind is speedrunning. what the speedrunning community does to games is mindblowing. now imagine it worked like a business and everyone who ever found a skip kept that information to themselves and sued anyone who tried using it. nobody would ever make any progress in speedrunning. that's the state of real life. it's embarrassing
@@stephenkamenar That's because 'intellectual property' is a really flawed concept. Especially in how it is executed within current law. That's because 'intellectual property' is nothing like actual property. Physical objects are scarce, information is not (though it may require work to be created in the first place). Heck, ownership of land is quite different from ownership of things. Regarding that 'working together' and stuff: imo trying to force people to do so is a very bad idea. We do cooperate in certain situations and it may work wonders, but trying to change the whole society into one hivemind has so far produced very poor results. And it would also be fundamentally unfair! Individuals should always be allowed to freely interact with each other, trade, make contracts, etc - so long as it's voluntary and without deception. Some related thoughts: - free market is what the above usually induces. It is a pretty miraculous thing, as it stimulates cooperation just because our incentives align - unfortunately, big corporations often fall into bureaucracy (just like governments) - in the present day copyright, patents and other 'IP'-related laws are often used to screw over the customer. They allow for vendor lock-in and walled gardens - tons of products remain under manufacturer control even after being sold. This is very close to actual deceit, as no one advertises anti-repairability, locked state of the software and other similar practices - control over the user is the most evident when it comes to software. We are immersed in proprietary, closed systems. This is especially true for web apps
Huawei still has ARM permanent license to use ARM instruction set. The problem is US's sanction to prohibit TSMC to make high end chips for them. They have the instruction set, design but no manufacturer. So Qualcomm sells Nuvia to China mean nothing. China is highly capable to design ARM chips. Aliyun has designed ARM server chips for internal use that match Amphere chips at performance and efficiency.
And this is part of why I lost interest in arm. This stupidity delays innovation. I am hoping riscv gets bigger and bigger to the point that arm starts to shrink
By not acquiring all of the licensing agreements with Nuvia, as well as ARM, BEFORE the deal was signed, Qualcomm has created a "can of worms" for itself. This is Qualcomm's fault. But this needs to be resolved quickly and I, personally, believe that ARM is in the right. As far as this encouraging developers to move to RISC-V, I don't think so. That's just wishful thinking.
arm will never have intel and amd rights to do x64. mobiles cpus are shit and there is no point to talk about it. i hope some day we will have access to full risc that emulates cisc today. imagine that power without microcode
ARM is poisoning themselves with this lawsuit and my guess is that this is what Qualcomm is banking on. There's a middle ground which should be reached and I would hope that is what yes achieved. If I were negotiating terms as ARM, I would provision that any ALA contracts give joint custody of the generated IP which could be relicensed as a TLA design. ARM designs would continue to improve and acquire more capabilities and the TLA licenses would provide a mass market solution. The companies which built their systems using ALA would have a first to market advantage and the entire ecosystem could mature and become more power per instruction efficient. Long term we just to see advances which create more powerful and efficient designs. As the licensor, ARM still has a path to profit by encouraging a higher adoption of their cores. They are biting the hands which feed them if they win this suit.
20:30 From what it sounds like, it absolutely seems to me like Arm is poisoning the well. If I had some influence in a company coming up with a long-term roadmap for some SoCs, this behavior from Arm would absolutely have me making contingencies to pivot to RISC-V if I wasn't already.
I noticed this background and recognized it and for a moment I thought I was going crazy and probably misremembered STH's Patrick new desk. IDK - anyway I look at this it looks bad for ARM. If they win, they will have such leverage over their customers that no-one will want to make new business with them. And no new companies will start. If they lose - well it is bad for ARM, because money. And they might be more cagey about licensing stuff. Damn Softbank. It is going to pop up RISCV. It would do more if it was more mature, but it will work in its favor regardless of what happens now.
yes they were. when you buy something groundbreaking that can potentially disrupt the market (5x gains) you can bet the rest of the market would try to kill you. also literally.
like mommy and daddy are fighting but dont worry guys arm and qcom still love you. lol the real reason is apple doesnt want qcom to take their chip devs. they want to cost qcom more money.
