Not having full cognizance of the complexity or capabilities (or lack thereof) of the full array of available ARM chips/chip designs, I will agree that my statement .. "Seeing how ARM's tech is built largely, if not totally, on the tech of the MMP, ..." is false; and may be defending an indefensible inaccuracy.

Your point is well taken. Not ALL chips on earth infringe the MMP.

As was the point of my last post, there are a lot of chips out there using old technology because that is all is needed to perform effectively in certain applications. Those are generally the cheap (inexpensive) chips.

And please recognize that ARM never entered the fray on the '148 or '336, but only on the '584 (where I strongly suspect they perceived weakness and ultimately prevailed, though the amended '584 is "TBD").

More complexity, more capability, less power consumption = higher cost.

High speed = MMP, whether via a variable speed clocking system (not bound by the constraints of a off-chip customary clock) "tuned" to the CPU by virtue of location/shared operating conditions, more efficient instruction fetch capabilities, or other efficiencies offered by various aspects of the MMP. Based on everything I've read and heard from a multitude of sources for years, this is the bottom line.

You have offered nothing that conflicts with this bottom line conclusion.

Right now (and up till now) all we need is for the USPTO to verify the proposed fact that the concepts of the MMP were indeed novel. IMO, on the '336, this has already been done; we're IMO just waiting for the USPTO to formally acknowledge it. The German/EU patent office already has.

FWIW,

SGE