Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 234 posts

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#181

Post by dboreham »

comex wrote: post #113
dboreham wrote: post #79

Logically this implies that I can't execute some i386 binary that I possess without infringing Intel patents. I think this theory of infringement has to run into various thought-experiment problems such as : can I auto-translate that binary into some other instruction set, then execute the translated binary, without infringing Intel patents? (yes, surely) Is the translator now infringing Intel patents because it has…

If you execute your i386 binary on an Intel, AMD, or other licensed processor, then you're protected by the doctrine of exhaustion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaustion_of_intellectual_pro... If you execute it in an emulator, though, all bets are off...

But I'm not executing it on an i386 emulator.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#182

Post by tinus_hn »

_delirium wrote: post #72
rayiner wrote: post #59

This marks a distinct shift for Intel. Historically, Intel's IP approach has focused on trade secrets, because they had a huge advantage in manufacturing and implementation techniques that are not easily reverse-engineered. Patent-protecting x86 didn't make much sense during the long period where nobody could make a general-purpose CPU as fast as Intel running native code, much less while emulating x86. As Moore's la…

That's the opposite of my impression of their history. Intel's approach to x86 historically has been asserting that it's basically impossible to implement a clone due to their patents, which they aggressively asserted to keep any competitors out of the market entirely if possible, and restricted to older ISA features if not possible. With the main exception of AMD, which was initially given patent licenses and tolera…

It's kind of difficult to believe this when the relevant architecture of today (x64) was developed by AMD. X86 is ancient, any patents that can't be avoided would have expired years ago.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#183

Post by zekevermillion »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #172
zekevermillion wrote: post #69

I'll just sit hear eating my popcorn and waiting for a lowRISC computer I can buy.

Can't see it happening in the next decade. However, if you're interested in embedded hardware, you can buy a RISC-V chip from SiFive now. https://www.sifive.com/#

Next decade?! That long???

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#184

Post by sqldba »

tinus_hn wrote: post #182
_delirium wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the opposite of my impression of their history. Intel's approach to x86 historically has been asserting that it's basically impossible to implement a clone due to their patents, which they aggressively asserted to keep any competitors out of the market entirely if possible, and restricted to older ISA features if not possible. With the main exception of AMD, which was initially given patent licenses and tolera…

It's kind of difficult to believe this when the relevant architecture of today (x64) was developed by AMD. X86 is ancient, any patents that can't be avoided would have expired years ago.

I'm always surprised when I read this. How long do patents last? I'd always thought they were indefinite or like copyright.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#185

Post by ghaff »

sqldba wrote: post #184
tinus_hn wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of difficult to believe this when the relevant architecture of today (x64) was developed by AMD. X86 is ancient, any patents that can't be avoided would have expired years ago.

I'm always surprised when I read this. How long do patents last? I'd always thought they were indefinite or like copyright.

No. Patents are generally valid for 20 years from the initial filing. The idea is that you get a limited term monopoly in exchange for making the details of an invention public.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#186

Post by emodendroket »

wayn3 wrote: post #180
gambiting wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm. So for example, a strength of X86 is that all reads and writes are synchronized by design, guaranteed by hardware. So if two threads call a write instruction, those instructions are guaranteed to happen in the order they were written in. You have no such guarantee on ARM. What's more, Intel has a patent for this. So now, if the same algorithm is implemented in software to emulate X86 platform on ARM, how is tha…

how can it possibly infringe on any kind of patent to "promise that commands are executed in order". maybe thats a difficult problem for hardware to solve. for software, thats just how software works. maple is solving differential equations and that may have at some point been difficult to write software for. if they have a patent for that, then so be it. I start a company that hires professors who are really good at…

There seems to be a lot of mingling here of the way things ought to be and the way they are.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#187

Post by emodendroket »

wtallis wrote: post #101
kakarot wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One has to wonder why this approach hasn't been successful in litigation against game console emulator developers.

How many suits against console emulators have gone to trial? I would think nobody who makes or sells console hardware actually wants to risk such a case going to trial, because the best case is that they win and can't recover any meaningful damages, but the worst case outcome is that they establish precedent that the emulator is legal.

Bleem did, at least.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#188

Post by chucklenorris »

clouddrover wrote: post #108
someSven wrote: post #102

May someone please elaborate on the difference between what MS does and emulators on Linux like Quemu and ExaGear?

Here's a Microsoft Channel 9 video in which they talk about the x86 emulation layer: https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Build/2017/P4171

I quickly watched this and they seem to be running a jit with disk caching. Also they had League of Legends on the desktop so i'm guessing they support sse instructions.

Re: Intel fires warning shots at Microsoft, says x86 emulation is a patent minefield

#190

Post by wayn3 »

emodendroket wrote: post #186
wayn3 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how can it possibly infringe on any kind of patent to "promise that commands are executed in order". maybe thats a difficult problem for hardware to solve. for software, thats just how software works. maple is solving differential equations and that may have at some point been difficult to write software for. if they have a patent for that, then so be it. I start a company that hires professors who are really good at…

There seems to be a lot of mingling here of the way things ought to be and the way they are.

there is. i have no idea how things actually are.

but laws should not contradict common sense.

Post reply on HN