Prev: vhdl versus verilog
Next: Controlling the I2C master from Opencores.org
From: Muzaffer Kal on 28 Apr 2010 23:38
On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:58:58 +0100, Symon <symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On 4/28/2010 6:11 PM, Muzaffer Kal wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 17:21:33 +0100, Symon<symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I wonder what will happen if Apple buy ARM?
>>>
>>> http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23826703-city-aflame-with-takeover-talk-of-arm-and-xstrata.do
>>>
>>> �A deal would make a lot of sense for Apple,� said one trader. �That
>>> way, they could stop ARM's technology from ending up in everyone else's
>>> computers and gadgets.�
>>
>> The agreements signed before the acquisition survive the acquisition
>> and if the licensees had any legal sense, there would be a clause
>> which states if the new owner couldn't support the licensees, they
>> would get a full rights perpetual license (in case ARM went bankrupt
>> and/or got acquired by someone who doesn't want to support the license
>> business anymore)
>
>Wow, we have a lawyer posting.

One doesn't have to be a lawyer to know what goes into these
agreements. I have been involved in IP license deals (and specifically
micro-processor IP license from an ARM competitor) and simply paid
attention to what the agreements says.

> Can I claim my first amendment rights if I use hyperbole on you?

I think you're prone to it so be my guest.

> Or will you use Justice Eady on me?

???
--
Muzaffer Kal

DSPIA INC.
ASIC/FPGA Design Services

http://www.dspia.com
From: Kim Enkovaara on 29 Apr 2010 01:18
On 29.4.2010 1:25, whygee wrote:
> Noone should let the marketing dept. create a product on a napkin,
> Austin should ask the real engineers ;-)

Fortunately the fpga vendors do not figure out themselves alone what
would be the next nice fpga. They run long questionaries and discussions
with engineers from big customers to define the future products.
From that material they create some kind of compromise that suits most
of the customers, and add their competitive twists to that.

--Kim
From: David Brown on 29 Apr 2010 04:49
On 28/04/2010 18:28, Pete Fraser wrote:
> "Symon"<symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hr9nai$9rp$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> I wonder what will happen if Apple buy ARM?
>
> There would be an interesting symmetry to that.
> IIRC the original ARM (by Acorn RISC Machines)
> owed quite a bit of its architecture to the 6502 used
> in the BBC micro (and also in early Apples).
>

It didn't exactly owe any of its architecture to the 6502, but the ARM
designers were extremely familiar with the 6502 and its pros and cons.
The original ARM was very much a "start from scratch" design based on
the most recent ideas in RISC development - in fact part of what made
the ARM different was that they had no legacy compatibility requirements
at all. It had to be fast enough to emulate a 6502 in software (so that
existing BBC Micro software could run), but that made no impact on the
hardware.

About the only architectural overlap I can think of is that the 6502
made substantial use of pipelining, which was considered a "RISC"
feature at the time it was designed, and was uncommon in such small CISC
chips.



From: Petter Gustad on 29 Apr 2010 08:12
Symon <symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com> writes:

> I wonder what will happen if Apple buy ARM?

Didn't Apple buy ARM a long time ago? I seem to remember that Apple
and VTI (VLSI Tools Inc) purchased a large share in Acorn many years
ago. That's actually how ARM was created if memory serves me right.

Petter
--
..sig removed by request.
From: Nico Coesel on 29 Apr 2010 11:57
Symon <symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 4/28/2010 6:12 PM, Nico Coesel wrote:
>> Symon<symon_brewer(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> way, they could stop ARM's technology from ending up in everyone else's
>>> computers and gadgets.�
>>
>> Apple buying ARM makes no sense at all. Why bother if you can get a
>> license for almost nothing. What Apple wants at this moment is to be
>> able to design their own SoCs for a tighter fit to their wishes in
>> order to reduce power consumption.
>>
>
>What part of "stop ARM's technology from ending up in everyone else's
>computers and gadgets.� would make no sense at all?

Such a move would get immediate attention from many trade commitees.
Possibly severe fines like Intel and Microsoft received from the EU to
start with.

>And how do you know what makes sense for Apple?

Follow what Apple has been doing (they never bought the PowerPC
architecture) and knowing how to build a competitive embedded
platform.

--
Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply
indicates you are not using the right tools...
nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
--------------------------------------------------------------
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: vhdl versus verilog
Next: Controlling the I2C master from Opencores.org