What are your reasons for not supporting this move? I have no skin in the game and no understanding of what's going on here.
Is there any example of a FPGA provider delivering better products after acquisition?
EDIT: I'd wager that if the last administration hadn't blocked the sale of Lattice it would now be dead.
> any example of a FPGA provider
Are there lots of FPGA companies that have gotten acquired in the first place? Only Altera comes to my mind.
Would the Xilinx/AMD acquisition make Lattice the biggest independent FPGA vendor?
From the AMD side of things, it's just expanding their offerings, and maybe bringing in some know-how and technologies that could help boost/extend their existing products.
If you have Xilinx stocks because you believe in what they're doing and predicting a bright future and possible dividend while at the same time don't see much of a future in the AMD64 platform, then why would you want AMD to the company.
Most stockholders don't care about the companies they invest in any more. It doesn't matter if they make FPGAs, cars or toaster ovens. What matters is that you can make a profit buying a stock now and selling it at a higher place down the road. Those kinds of stockholder won't block an AMD takeover if the price is right.
Making a profit has been the point of buying and selling stocks literally since day one, when the Dutch East India Company issued publicly tradeable shares in 1602.
If you want to show your support for the vision of a company, buy their t-shirts. If you're buying their shares (typically not even from the company itself, but from another shareholder) for that reason, you're doing it wrong.
but, why? do we need more than 16 exabytes of memory?
Joking aside, we very well may one day have more memory available that 64 address lines can handle. RISC-V’s spec does have a stub chapter for “RV128”