- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
very good point, as we know MS sells per CPU for license and it seems some other companies want to do this aswel.....
This is something i had even though about until now.. Personally i feel that if the core is in a seperate encasing then yes, but if it is built into the same chip then no.
This is something i had even though about until now.. Personally i feel that if the core is in a seperate encasing then yes, but if it is built into the same chip then no.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Should Dual Cores Require Dual Licenses? |
| from the symmetrical-multi-paying dept. |
| posted by CowboyNeal on Saturday February 12, @12:46 (The Almight|
| http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/12/1518245 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
[0]sebFlyte writes "The multi-core debate continues. HP and Intel [1]have laid into Oracle and (to a lesser extent) BEA over their their treatment of multi-core processers. Oracle's argument that 'a core is a CPU and therefore you should pay us all your money' [2]isn't a popular one, it would seem. What does Oracle's stubbornness imply for the industry as a whole, with multicore chips coming to the fore so strongly?"
Discuss this story at:
http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=05/02/12/1518245
Links:
0. http://slashdot.org/~sebFlyte
1. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39187579,00.htm
2. http://comment.zdnet.co.uk/other/0,39020682,39187577,00.htm