3 Jun
2013
3 Jun
'13
3:33 p.m.
On 6/3/13, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
[re: x86]
Yes it is. However, it has thrived when simpler,
cleaner CPU
architectures have failed. Possibly an exemplar of the "worse is
better" school of thought, possibly because of its installed base of
software, possibly because of the tools, chipsets etc. - or possibly
because of the strength of Microsoft, who knows.
I'd guess one major factor is that Intel's early market domination
allowed it to sink lots of money into chip design and R&D -- IOW, they
succeeded in spite of the architecture, not because of it. "With
sufficient thrust, pigs can fly."