"David LeBlanc" <whisper@[...].net>  writes:
>  News to me that Intel crushed Digital with their patents... and BTW, ARM is
>  an english production (http://www.arm.com/) that Digital was a 2nd source
>  for. Did Digital make some important enhancements to the ARM architecture? I
>  vaguely recall some fab improvements they where given credit for...

ARM licenses their designs far and wide; the last time I looked,
several dozen licensees were listed on their web site.  Digital was
more like a 30th source than a second one.  But most of the licensees
incorporate the ARM core into low-speed, very-low-power
microcontrollers; the Digital StrongARM was almost alone in trying to
compete on speed with desktop CPUs.  And that is why the StrongARM is
still the chip of choice for things like the Zaurus, although it is
certainly not without competition from (among others) low-power MIPS
designs and the SH family.

>  IMO Digital fell due to bad management (more like stupid, incompetent),
>  brain-dead marketing, greed and de-emphasis of and inabilty to apply R&D to
>  the marketplace.

These may all be true.  I was talking about something more specific:
after an exchange of patent lawsuits lasting a year or two, Intel and
Digital settled.  Part of the settlement was that Digital's fabs and
StrongARM line went to Intel.

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list