It's more complicated: simply put. ARM licenses cores and its architecture for the ARM instruction sets. If you license cores and other logic (not necessarily just from ARM, you can get GPUs from other vendors), you can stack the IP blocks together to make your own System-on-a-Chip (SoC). Hence, even if you all have access to the same blocks, you may want to configure them differently to optimize them for your needs.
ARM also licenses its instruction set architecture, meaning you can design your own CPUs, but if you stick to the ARM instruction set, you are sure that it works with all the existing ARM software out there. This way you can design your own specialized CPU cores but be absolutely sure that all the existing software (e. g. Android and all the compilers out there) will just work. Apple, Qualcomm and Samsung have architecture licenses as well as core licenses in addition to core licenses so that they can design their own ARM compatible cores. Apple first used their own CPU cores in the iPhone 5, and has managed to become the industry leader in ARM cores. The A10 which is built into the iPhone 7 is about as fast as the Intel CPU that you find in a MacBook or a 2013 13" MacBook Pro. Before the iPhone 5, they used vanilla ARM cores that they optimized themselves. It is rumored that the SoC in the Apple Watch 1 is also from ARM.
You are switching ARM and AMD here: ARM allows you to license “IP blocks” which could be CPU cores, GPUs, interconnects and special logic to support things like cameras.
It depends in this case how pixels are counted: is it a 40 MP sensor (i. e. 40 MP times 3 colors) or a
bona fide 120 MP sensor. If it is the latter, I don't think it makes much sense even at full frame sensor size, there is nary a lens that has good enough resolution and you'd run into diffraction — unless your lenses are very bright, but then you'd have trouble constructing a lens that can come close to resolving 120 MP. I don't think more than 24 MP on APS-C-sized sensors and 40~50 MP on full frame sensors makes sense. Even the latter is pushing it IMHO.
[doublepost=1474506809][/doublepost]
Well, they still can, they also have a dslr-like X-T2 and a rangefinder-like X-Pro2 in their X-mount line-up. As someone who loves their hybrid viewfinder, in the same phantasy world where I could afford Fuji's medium format camera, I'd also like a rangefinder-style body
I don't think that camera style is in their DNA, they are all about true digital cameras that shed a lot of the analog traditions (which I happen to like).