How do we get IBM back in the consumer processor game, /g/?

first class operating system support is not enough. Are there even any fast JavaScript compilers on PPC?

>>62141000
They don't even make thinkpads anymore the support was too expensive. They switched over to all Macs, now they just werk.

tfw ibm have trash talked x86 for years and shut themselves out of consumer desktops forever

>>62141100
>with sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine
But x86 IS trash.

>>62141000
>muh brand
First, why would they want to be, and why should they be? Who needs yet another shitty overwrought ISA?

>>62141000
>tfw my uni has a 576-core IBM supercomputer

>>62141543
POWER9?

>>62141138
It is trash, but everyone depends on it and is how the consumer controls the companies.
If was not by x86, we probably would have much more cancerous practices by intel.

Bring back IBM ThinkPads

>>62141000
You don't, they can't compete anywhere but USDOD contracts due to legacy.
IBM isn't even competitive in HPC, the only market they still make processors for.

Literally the only thing worth paying for from IBM is Watson and that doesn't actually need to run on POWER hardware.

>>62141578
>how the consumer controls the companies.
>If was not by x86, we probably would have much more cancerous practices by intel.
wat
t.ARM

>>62141633
If was not by the legacy need, intel would be allowed to change the architecture every 4 years or so and purposefully break OSes in the process and force consumers into getting the newest shit, even if it is shittier than the older one.

And ARM got on the same boat.

>>62141667
I'm not complaining about the existence of a standard ISA. I'm complaining about the standard ISA being complete shit.

>>62141715
Ah yes.
Well, it's not THAT bad after all the patchwork and translation layers, but could be better yes.
All it does is to act like a crude compression.