I'd make the argument that TCP/IP Illustrated Volume 1 covers the details of TCP/IP in a very "packet and fields" oriented way. Volume 2 goes into a lot of the "data structures and implementation" way. That makes for a very good supplemental reference, but makes for a less than ideal introductory textbook on the subject of computer networking.
Kurose's book really does take the top-down approach from high level networking concepts through the application layer to the transport layer and downward. It provides just enough of the necessary details (here's a datagram with fields A and B) over a comprehensive list of all the details (here's every field, every field size, and a list of every field option).
I agree that five books won't ever cover every discipline withing Computer Science. Just providing an introductory book, a university-level textbook, and an expert/graduate-level reference for each discipline turns into a long list.
There's almost too much volume these days. There's dedicated websites/apps/podcasts for Apple, Android, PC gaming, Xbox gaming, PS4 gaming, Switch gaming, etc. Product Hunt was a hot thing for a while and is still running. In terms of more general coverage, The Verge, Engadget, Lifehacker, Wired, and NYT Wirecutter are still good among many many others.
There was a good run of Computer Chronicles, TechTV, and G4 for a while there. These days, This Week in Tech still exists in podcast form. G4 had a short revival as G4TV a few years back. There's nothing nearly as popular these days, but there's still lots of good ones like Waveform, SomeGadgetGuy, and AwesomeCast.
There is very little with a) high technical quality in the presented content, b) an assumption that the average viewer is reasonably intelligent, and c) high production quality.
The Computer Chronicles was kind of unique that way.
Edit: OTOH I just saw a 55 minute well-produced youtube video on ASML's EUV photolithography machine that fulfilled all of that. I had some bias against this channel for some reason I don't remember, but anyway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiUHjLxm3V0.
Veritassium is in a league of its own. Just take a look at their last year's videos. The production value is just second to none.
They have enough of a following now that they can dedicate 55 minutes to something and not worry about the algorithm, which usually dictates much shorter form factors
This was the first of their videos that impressed me. Looking back, I have watched a few of their videos per year. Previous were videos tended have much less content density and quality.
I really enjoyed the segments where they let ASML's (now former) CTO Martin van den Brink just talk.
Henessey and Patterson "Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach" has 6 published editions (1990, 1996?, 2003, 2006, 2011, 2019) with the 7th due November 2025. Each edition would have a varying set of CPUs as examples for each chapter. For example, the various chapters in the 2nd edition has sections on the MIPS R4000 and the PowerPC 620, while the 3rd edition has sections on the Trimedia TM32, Intel P6, Intel IA-64, Alpha 21264, Sony PS2 Emotion Engine, Sun Wildfire, MIPS R4000, and MIPS R4300. From what I could figure out via web searches, the 6th edition has RISC-V in the appendix, but the 3rd through 5th editions has the MIPS R4000.
Patterson and Hennessy "Computer Organization and Design: The Hardware/Software Interface" has had 6 editions (1998, 2003, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2020) but various editions have had ARM, MIPS, and RISC-V specific editions.
TSMC's estimated costs in 2020, were $12 billion for their first fab. In 2025, their updated estimates were $65 billion for the first three fabs and $165 billion for when they get to six such facilities. So, $8.9B is a lot of money, but isn't anywhere close to getting to the equivalent to what TSMC has in Taiwan.
> getting to the equivalent to what TSMC has in Taiwan
That wasn't the question. The question, at least for me, is can you build non-zero chip production, enough to start building out a sustainable business. Obviously you're not going to compete with TSMC on day one, but there's a wide spectrum between that and "garage".
How would you build a sustainable business based on old processes though? The only reason fabs exist that use old processes is because they were once new processes, and once they've been built you may as well keep them running for a while. Building a new 50 nm fab would never be viable.
Those old fabs are still able to be useful at all because most applications don't need cutting edge chips. Chips have been Good Enough for decades. And again, if the goal actually is manufacturing independence, buying local chips that are a bit more expensive is totally worth it.
The Windows 9x series (and earlier) were tightly coupled with x86 (and DOS).
The Windows NT family of operating systems has always had the "Hardware Abstraction Layer" (aka HAL) which helped with porting the operating system to other architectures.
I don't expect any single article to cover all the details of a company that just passed it's 30th year. And even then, they're missing bits of lore, like the CEO playing ping pong as a teenager (see https://engineering.stanford.edu/news/jen-hsun-huang-nvidia-...).
This WIRED article from 2002 gives an interesting snapshot of the same company and CEO:
Meet Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang, the man who plans to make the CPU obsolete.
https://www.wired.com/2002/07/nvidia/
- Quote: "What we can do in the next five years is going to blow your mind. In 10 years, we should be bigger than Intel." (which took until July 2020)
Then you can see how things evolved by the 2009/2010 timeframe, plus where they thought they might be headed:
Mercury News interview: Jen-Hsun Huang, co-founder of Nvidia
https://www.mercurynews.com/2009/10/09/mercury-news-interview-jen-hsun-huang-co-founder-of-nvidia/
I’m Prepared for Adversity. I Waited Tables.
https://archive.is/2iUbf
Even prior to those guys, Shockley, Bardeen, and Brattain have the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work. Kilby received the same in 2000 (Noyce passed away in 1990).
Kurose's book really does take the top-down approach from high level networking concepts through the application layer to the transport layer and downward. It provides just enough of the necessary details (here's a datagram with fields A and B) over a comprehensive list of all the details (here's every field, every field size, and a list of every field option).
reply