Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!sugar!ficc!karl
From: karl@ficc.uu.net (karl lehenbauer #)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why no RISC clones?
Message-ID: <2329@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 30 Nov 88 16:27:26 GMT
References: <5030006@hpesoc1.HP.COM>
Organization: Ferranti International Controls
Lines: 15

In article <5030006@hpesoc1.HP.COM>, nicholso@hpesoc1.HP.COM (Ron Nicholson) writes:
> What I don't understand is this: how do RISC designers protect their
> investment.  A large part of the investment seems to be in deciding what
> not to implement.  This becomes public when the instruction set manual is
> published.

Most of the RISC vendors seem to have realized that the path to success for
their chip is for it to be designed into a lot of equipment, that is, to be
successful the chip needs to be popular and sell well.  Consequently, rather
than guarding their designs they are trying very hard to license them and
and get them second-sourced.  For example, SPARC.  In other word, RISC vendors
hope to "protect their investment" by selling a lot of chips.
-- 
-- +1 713 274 5184, uunet!ficc!karl
-- Ferranti International Controls, 12808 W. Airport Blvd., Sugar Land, TX 77478