Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Intel's core product became big primarily due to decisions they had nothing to do with.
Roll back the clock to IBM developing their first PC. They usually developed hardware in house, but they were late to the game and needed something fast. They choose to use off the shelf hardware, with the BIOS being the one thing that's proprietary.
For the CPU, they could have gone with Motorola or MOS or Texas Instruments. They choose Intel. Why? Because Intel fulfilled a memory contract on another project, so sure, use their 8088.
Compaq then reverse engineers the BIOS and the whole thing pases legal muster. Now anybody can make a compatible, but they have to use the same CPU that IBM did.
Microsoft does its thing with DOS and Windows. Everyone is writing software against that. Now everyone starts getting locked in.
After that, all Intel has to do is keep x86 going well enough that nobody wants to make the effort to switch. Yes, AMD and Cyrix are out there, but at this point, they're both the cheap alternative that isn't as good.
They fucked up the 64-bit transition. AMD did the version we all use now.
Intel's entire success is based on making good on a memory contract to IBM decades ago. That's it. It hinges primarily on decisions they did not make themselves. Weren't even in the room at the time.
Also they did that netburst stuff that was a bad idea, and let AMD beat them to the punch on integrated memory controller... So many scenarios where Intel flubbed the "big change".
However they have frequently been good on the little stuff. For a long time they had a fab advantage (and have messed that up for a decade now). There are decent at dotting the "I"s and crossing the ts, including broader software and firmware enablement.
Nowadays the only software people care about is CUDA and AMD actually has cash to take care of a lot of little things. Intel kept trying to make side efforts happen, like having a rack of memory and processors freely associated in ways no one ever asked for, phase change memory which while cool, was an awkward in-between NAND and SDRAM, various FPGA efforts which they never really figured out the actual point, putting an infiniband variant in the processor package in an awkward way that just made things worse, and a ton of weird accelerator architectures they abandoned within a couple years each time..
Yes, and that really puts the Raptor Lake failures in perspective. It undermined this whole argument that Intel stuff is rock solid even if it's not the best in other ways. Xeon stuff was affected, too, and given how lucrative the server market is, that may have been the biggest mistake Intel has made.