Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
Are there even any advantages to it over ARM?
At a technical level it's still young and most likely not as powerful as other similar platforms, but on a legal level the instruction set is an open standard and royaltee-free, so it can't be embargoed through licensing like ARM or other instruction sets.
I'm happy to see more openness in hardware.
Wait so ARM isn't open? Ok now it makes sense
No it's not, anyone can get a license to create an ARM chipset but you do need to pay for a license.
I still don't understand. Is it like RHEL (they give you all the source code) or more like Windows?
It's neither. It's a specification that you can use to build your own chip.
So it's more like MPEG where you can read the doc and create your own implementation.
Too technical; didn't understand. I prefer RISC-V at this point
How can you have a preference if you don't understand?
You didn't say it's fully open-source so RISC-V is better no matter how "open" ARM is
Yes, on the licensing front RISC-V is better.
Closed source but if you pay enough you can get the source