Someone skipped the architecture history class. The x86 naming convention has nothing to do with sequential versioning—it comes from the Intel 8086 processor released in 1978, followed by the 80186, 80286, 80386, and 80486. The "x" became a wildcard for the series. Then x86-64 (or x64) is the 64-bit extension of the x86 architecture, not a downgrade. Imagine Intel engineers reading this and thinking "Should we tell them, or let them keep wondering why we skipped x87 through x63?" Plot twist: x87 actually exists—it's the floating-point coprocessor instruction set. So technically Intel DID make x87, just not in the way this person thinks. The real question is: if ARM is so good, why isn't there ARM2 yet? Checkmate, architecture nerds.