>>> when everything is hardware accelerated, there is much less uses for several cores.

>> You can't hardware-accelerate everything.

> Of course, you cannot hardware accelerate everything.

I'm glad I could convince you :-)

>> Due to its single CPU core, the SoC wouldn't be popular with anything other than
>> single-core operating systems such as Amiga-like OS. I doubt IP licensors would
>> go without fixed licensing fee in this case.

> I do not see any reason why licensors would require an upfront licence fee on
> single-core SoCs (but not multi core ones).

The reason is anticipated sales figures of the SoC. The IP licensor will be the more inclined to do licensing based on "cost per unit produced" (as you put it) the more sales he expects. A widely deployable SoC will generate more sales than a less-widely deployable SoC. Most popular operating systems can make use of multiple CPU cores through SMP, so that's where the market (and the money) is. A single-core SoC would run worse with the popular operating systems, so the IP licensor will anticipate less sales of the SoC, which in turn will make him demand a fixed licensing fee (that is higher than what he expects to get from a license based on "cost per unit produced").

> You said it is becose it would only be usefull to one operating system

No, I said it was because it would only be popular with single-core operating systems such as Amiga-like OS.

> most, if not all SoCs are only used in one project (and therefore by one operating system).

No, most SoCs are used in numerous projects and by a number of operating systems. The more projects a SoC is used in, the more successful it will be. And multicore SoCs will be preferred for projects aimed at popular SMP-capable operating systems.

>> the MorphOS team is not a registered company.

> Where did you get this?

"The MorphOS development team is a group of individuals[...]"
http://www.morphos-team.net/team

> As far as I understand the company is called MorphOS Development and
> headquartered in Wingate Park in South Africa.

This is Mark Olsen's current home address. Former home addresses:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080715161251/http://www.morphos-team.net/imprint.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20081009233831/http://www.morphos-team.net/imprint.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20110814104948/http://www.morphos-team.net/imprint.html

What is the legal structure of this alleged registered "MorphOS Development" company?

> p6400

P6600.

> there will either be a new architecture breaking into the market besides ARM/x86 for
> both small devices and servers, in which case the MIPS seems most likely as it is
> already used by chinese manufacturers and is supported by the android OS

I don't see the connection between servers on the one hand and chinese manufacturers and Android on the other hand.

> manufacturers will prefer a common architecture for both lightweight devices and servers
> to control costs. [...] if the combined-use MIPS market does develop [...]

Manufacturers of lightweight devices and manufacturers of servers hardly overlap. Lightweight devices and servers are distinct markets. Even if the same ISA was prevalent in both, it would be completely different SoCs/chips and even microarchitectures.