“Most of them will fail complete without ever anybody hearing about them. But even the successful ones take a stumble or two,” says Torvalds.
  • just_another_person@lemmy.worldEnglish
    5·
    4 months ago

    He’s being misquoted by the headline. He FEARS that it will make the same mistakes. Let’s be clear about RISC is here in the first place: an open-source hardware architecture. Anyone with enough money and willpower to fork it for their needs will do so. It’s anyone’s game still. He’s just simply saying that the same type of people who took over ARM and x86 are doomed to make the same mistakes. Not that RISC-V is bad.

    • bitfucker@programming.devEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      I’m being pedantic here but RISC-V is not a hardware architecture as in something that you can send to a manufacturer and get it made. It is an ISA. How you implement those ISA is up to you. Yes there are open implementations but I think it is important to distinguish it.

        • bitfucker@programming.devEnglish
          1·
          4 months ago

          So does x86. The difference is license. Just like how Intel and AMD have a VERY different design (implementation) as of now, so does RISC-V. Any vendor can implement it however they want, but they won’t have to pay anyone for using RISC-V ISA

  • BobGnarley@lemm.eeEnglish
    2·
    4 months ago

    RISC-V is the only shot we have at usable open source hardware. I really, really hope it takes off.

    • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
      2·
      4 months ago

      Whilst some open source implementations exist, RISC-V is not open source. It’s an open standard. i.e. there’s no license fee to implement it.

      • BobGnarley@lemm.eeEnglish
        2·
        4 months ago

        I didn’t know that I thought all RISC-V was open source :( I’m not as familiar with it as I’d like to be. I might just have to dive into it more and change that soon

        • woelkchen@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          4 months ago

          I didn’t know that I thought all RISC-V was open source :(

          If RISC-V was under some copyleft license where chip designs would have to be made open source, nobody from the chip industry would support RISC-V. They want “kinda like ARM but without licensing fees”.

  • lps@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1·
    4 months ago

    Well regardless, the world needs alternatives that are outside of restrictive US patent law and large monopolistic control. Thank god for pioneers:)

    • Transient Punk@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      He doesn’t list what the mistakes will be. He said that he fears that because hardware people aren’t software people, that they will make the same mistakes that x86 made, which were then made by Arm later.

      He did mention that fixing those mistakes was faster for Arm than x86, so that brings hope that fixing the mistakes on Risc V will take less time

    • SpikesOtherDog@ani.socialEnglish
      0·
      4 months ago

      Basically, his concern is that if they are not cooperating with software engineers that the product won’t be able to run AAA games.

      It’s more of a warning than a prediction.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              0·
              4 months ago

              Not OP, but consider using FUTO Keyboard. It’s made by the group Louis Rossmann works with, and it has offline speech to text (no sending data to Google), swipe keyboard, and completions. It’s also source-available, which isn’t as good as open source, but you could examine the code and verify their claims if you wanted to.

              I’m using it and, while it’s not perfect, it’s way better than the open source Android keyboards with swiping that I’ve tried.

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    0·
    4 months ago

    smells like linus thinks there is going to be an ever increasing tech debt, and honestly, i think i agree with him on that one.

    RISCV is likely going to eventually overstep it’s role in someplaces, and bits and pieces of it will become archaic over time.

    The gap between hardware and software level abstraction is huge, and that’s really hard to fill properly. You just need a strict design criteria to get around that one.

    I’m personally excited to see where RISCV goes, but maybe what we truly need is a universal software level architecture that can be used on various different CPU architectures providing maximum flexibility.