We Get Letters
Some anonymous guy over at TechNudge opined:
No, AMD let IT managers make a safe case for upgrading when there was insecurity in what they were upgrading to. That's a brilliant PR move.
The whole "buy 32-bit now and be ready for 64-bit later" was a dodge - a crafty one, but a dodge nonetheless. It's never actually worked in computing (or much else for that matter) because by the time "later" shows up what you bought is typically obsolete for a variety of resons. But armed with AMD's marketing hype, Mr. IT Manager could go to the bean counter with what sounded like a viable plan to keep his budget alive. Brilliant!
I noted aboutIntel elsewhere, its pro-consumer stance stopped at the Celery --but only because a whole bunch of morons accepted the chip over my better advice.
As for AMD's merit, there's as much evidence that its supposed superiority in gaming is because of the use of optimizing compiler flags as there is for the chip itself. Otherwise, it has almost always been a come-along company for the dull and the boring --although a decent foil (pre-Celery) to use to get Intel to lower its prices.
AMD has never been pro-consumer. It maintained low prices because it had to do so in competition with Intel and then it reached up through your sphincter when it thought it had the opportunity with its X2s --which is the same evil approach Intel has taken with the Core 2 Duo. Hopefully, consumers won't let Intel get away with it and first impressions are that they're not. Supposedly, C2D sales are not as robust as their pre-release hype might have had one suspect they would be.
Bill said: "The Itanium was actually a great idea. AMD just had a better PR campaign."Gee, it sounds good. History, however, tells a different story.
Only if you love a monopoly was the Itanium a good idea. And what Intel shareholder wouldn't? Problem was AMD64 was the natural/evolutionary step and AMD came up with it in time to counter the Itanium. How can you hold a pro consumer stance and argue for Intel's proprietary solution.
AMD has never had a PR campaign worth a sh*t. AMD won on merit.
No, AMD let IT managers make a safe case for upgrading when there was insecurity in what they were upgrading to. That's a brilliant PR move.
The whole "buy 32-bit now and be ready for 64-bit later" was a dodge - a crafty one, but a dodge nonetheless. It's never actually worked in computing (or much else for that matter) because by the time "later" shows up what you bought is typically obsolete for a variety of resons. But armed with AMD's marketing hype, Mr. IT Manager could go to the bean counter with what sounded like a viable plan to keep his budget alive. Brilliant!
I noted aboutIntel elsewhere, its pro-consumer stance stopped at the Celery --but only because a whole bunch of morons accepted the chip over my better advice.
As for AMD's merit, there's as much evidence that its supposed superiority in gaming is because of the use of optimizing compiler flags as there is for the chip itself. Otherwise, it has almost always been a come-along company for the dull and the boring --although a decent foil (pre-Celery) to use to get Intel to lower its prices.
AMD has never been pro-consumer. It maintained low prices because it had to do so in competition with Intel and then it reached up through your sphincter when it thought it had the opportunity with its X2s --which is the same evil approach Intel has taken with the Core 2 Duo. Hopefully, consumers won't let Intel get away with it and first impressions are that they're not. Supposedly, C2D sales are not as robust as their pre-release hype might have had one suspect they would be.
Digg This
Del.icio.us
posted by Bill at 4:13 PM
1 Comments:
I know I've been disappointed in the C2D prices, like I was in the Athlon X2 prices.
As long as they keep this up, I'll soldier on with my single core processor.
--Jonas
Post a Comment
<< Home