Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:08:25 -0500, BGB wrote:

Or if quantum computing can give answers "better" than classical
computers using non-brute-force algorithms.

This is why it’s worth distinguishing between “digital” and “analog”
computers. Analog computers were quite popular in the earlier part of the
20th century, back when digital computers were still quite slow. They
could come up with quick answers to physical-simulation problems, albeit
to limited accuracy.

For example, the Apollo Saturn-V rocket was controlled by a hybrid
digital/analog computer system created by IBM, housed in the ring that
coupled the third stage to the upper part with the CSM and LEM. The
digital part computed where the rocket was supposed to go, but it could
only solve the equations about once a second or so; it fed these numbers
to the analog part, which could adjust the direction and thrust of the
engines much more quickly than that, to keep the whole vehicle functioning
properly and on course from millisecond to millisecond.

But anyway, the current “quantum” computers have shown some success
solving “analog” style problems, but even the simplest “digital” type
operation, namely something involving factorizing integers, has so far
completely eluded them.