Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

"Intel's Worst Nightmare"

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 10, 2006 5:24:31 PM

I think Ruiz needs some cheese with that whine.
Related resources
August 10, 2006 5:30:37 PM

Quote:
I think Ruiz needs some cheese with that whine.


Cheese ball! :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
August 10, 2006 5:38:10 PM

Great find. Very interesting article. It would not surprise me one bit if Intel struck exclusionary deals with companies.
August 10, 2006 5:41:39 PM

But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?
August 10, 2006 5:48:08 PM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


You need to know the meaning of MONOPOLY :lol: 
August 10, 2006 6:07:02 PM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


For those 10-year-old fanboys out there that may not know (I posted this and before you added your sarcasm post) here's a definition...

MONOPOLY:
"Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly "

From: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/monopoly
August 10, 2006 6:26:40 PM

smart aleck

An impudent or obnoxiously self-assertive individual, a wise guy, as in New teachers often have a hard time coping with the smart alecks in their classes. This expression, dating from the mid-1800s, probably alluded to a person of this description who was named Alec or Alexander, but his identity has been lost.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer.
Copyright © 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
August 11, 2006 4:26:06 AM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


You need to know the meaning of MONOPOLY :lol: 

Monopoly my butt. Just because a company is successful at making more money, like Dell, Microsoft and Intel, these companies would get a accused of monopoly because waahhhhh AMD wants a larger piece of the pie. If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today? Dell is very succesfully at selling computers and Intel has brought the computing industry this far. People complain about them being too big. They have boost the economy and provided 100K+ jobs for a lot of people. Their research have taken the industries in leaps and bounds. AMD suprise suprise did not get this far by themselves. Intel gave them licensing rights to copy Intels designs. AMD, just made in the last 2yrs a better processor with borrowed former Intel employees. Thus begins the competition. Stop pointing fingers and sit back and reap the rewards of better processors and cheaper prices. I knew Intel wasn't going to sit on their donkey forever and take it. Neither will AMD. They are just too small. They will need to grow with more resources. Putting more fabs will help them. Buying ATI right now was a stupid move especially with Intel success with the C2D. I don't think Intel is going to look back. AMD might be in trouble.
August 11, 2006 4:27:32 AM

Er, well, Microsoft wasn't just accused of being a monopoly, they were actually convicted of being one. :roll:
August 11, 2006 4:28:18 AM

true, companies just want more money... intel has been doing a good job at what their doing, its called competition. i doubt the court would favor AMD
August 11, 2006 5:04:19 AM

Quote:
I just want my $10-sucky-sucky chips like in the days of Thunderbird, Barton and Coppermine. That hasn't be the case last year (hence I didn't buy anything) and I'm pissed off at both companies.

Whatever the outcome is I just want my chips cheaper.


everyone wins when chips are cheaper :D  (except for intel and AMD...)
August 11, 2006 5:34:11 AM

Great article. Good find.

It is a little suspicious how AMD's 21% market share in 2001 suddenly just disappeared. At the time, AMD had very competitive products. It wasn't until the P4 Northwood that Intel had a processor that could compete with AMD's AthlonXP. Northwood was intro'd in mid 2003 if I remember correctly.

But Ruiz is right, the only thing stopping Intel from destroying AMD is this lawsuit. Intel has to be really careful in how it deals with OEM's until this lawsuit is settled; which won't be for at least a few more years...
August 11, 2006 5:45:13 AM

Quote:
If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today?


I'm sorry, I don't usually get nasty... but that is an incredibly ignorant statement. As for the rest of your post, it's also very misinformed.

You DO realize that Microsoft has done VERY LITTLE inventing in its history. M$ is good at stealing tech and then licensing when a court battle is on the horizon. They're also very good at buying companies they steal tech from as a way of "settling" lawsuits. The only thing M$ has that's worth a damn is an experienced and intelligent legal team.

M$ did not invent the office suite, they didn't invent the word processor, they didn't invent the spreadsheet, and they sure as hell haven't contributed anything useful to the office application market. For the past 10 years we've had the same farking office productivity software. Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint. And the ONLY thing that gotten progressively better is Outlook. Since Office 2000, M$ has gotten nowhere in terms of innovation. It's all the same shi*t. And there isn't a SINGLE thing that M$ office does that OpenOffice/StarOffice can't do. NOT ONE.

Ugh... I feel dumber having read your post. I usually just ignore retarded posts like yours... but for some reason I can't ignore this one. Not even BM is as ignorant as you are. Please, for the sake of everyone's IQ, please don't post here again.
August 11, 2006 6:15:41 AM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


You need to know the meaning of MONOPOLY :lol: 

Monopoly my butt. Just because a company is successful at making more money, like Dell, Microsoft and Intel, these companies would get a accused of monopoly because waahhhhh AMD wants a larger piece of the pie. If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today? Dell is very succesfully at selling computers and Intel has brought the computing industry this far. People complain about them being too big. They have boost the economy and provided 100K+ jobs for a lot of people. Their research have taken the industries in leaps and bounds. AMD suprise suprise did not get this far by themselves. Intel gave them licensing rights to copy Intels designs. AMD, just made in the last 2yrs a better processor with borrowed former Intel employees. Thus begins the competition. Stop pointing fingers and sit back and reap the rewards of better processors and cheaper prices. I knew Intel wasn't going to sit on their donkey forever and take it. Neither will AMD. They are just too small. They will need to grow with more resources. Putting more fabs will help them. Buying ATI right now was a stupid move especially with Intel success with the C2D. I don't think Intel is going to look back. AMD might be in trouble.

OK... i did some thinking. For the sake of argument, let's take 3 major technology segments and compare the innovation of each from the past 5 years. The comparison's will be made to Windows XP.

Since 2001, performance of desktop CPU's has quadrupled. We've gone from single core to dual core processors. Go compare a 1.4Ghz Thunderbird (which was the best processor in 2001) to a Athlon FX 62 in the CPU Charts on this site.

Since 2001, broadband speeds have also quadrupled. In 2001, the average DSL line speed was around 384kbps. The max was 640kbps in most areas. For Cable, AT&T Broadband had 1.5mbits. In 2006, we have DSL speeds well over 1mbits (some city has 10mbits now) and most major areas with cable internet are at 6mbits. Better yet, prices have either dropped or gone unchanged since 2001.

In 2001, most of us were talking on monochrome Nokia and Motorola phones. They were incapable of browsing the internet, incapable of playing MP3's, only a couple phones had cameras, and virtually all were incapable of doing anything except talking on. These days the majority of phones have cameras, EVDO, music capabilities, and a slew of other things. And let's not forget about the blackberry explosion.

In 2001, we had the GeForce 3 and the first ATI Radeon. On the 3DFX side we had the Voodoo3. Since then, graphics power has quadrupled. We went from video cards with 64MB of RAM to 512MB of RAM. and 256MB is standard these days. While I'm on the subject... we've gone from SDRAM that runs at 100mhz to 266Mhz (or 533Mhz DDR) standard in every machine. Hell, Athlon64's are at 400mhz (non-DDR) now! Bandwidth is through the roof.

In October 2001 we had Windows XP. In August 2006, we have... uhhh... Windows XP. And when is Vista coming? The latest I heard was a possible SECOND HALF release in 2007. At the earliest Vista won't be released until Jan 07, which seems very unlikely to me. 6 f'ing years for a new operating system. 6 years. I simply can't wrap my mind around it.

If this isn't a prime example of why a monopoly is bad, I don't know what is. It's ridiculous that the entire world is on hold for Operating System innovation. And why is it on hold? Because Microsoft has a god damned monopoly. You know damn well that if M$ had a company to compete against (like Intel has AMD), we'd would have been running Vista over 2 years ago. And let's not even get started on Internet Explorer. When was IE6 released? Oh yeah... back in 2001 too. Only when firefox threatens market share does M$ bother to do any serious work on IE7. Meanwhile we've got linux fighting for it's life and trying to tell the world "look at me, I'm better!" And it IS better. Linux has come such a long way since 2001. How far has Windows XP come since 2001? 2 service packs? Wow.

One more parallel- all the above mentioned tech segments (with the exception of OS's) are all very competitive.
August 11, 2006 6:25:27 AM

Quote:
Great article. Good find.

It is a little suspicious how AMD's 21% market share in 2001 suddenly just disappeared. At the time, AMD had very competitive products. It wasn't until the P4 Northwood that Intel had a processor that could compete with AMD's AthlonXP. Northwood was intro'd in mid 2003 if I remember correctly.

But Ruiz is right, the only thing stopping Intel from destroying AMD is this lawsuit. Intel has to be really careful in how it deals with OEM's until this lawsuit is settled; which won't be for at least a few more years...


Nothing personal, but for the record, Intel's Northwood P4s launched in January of 2002.
August 11, 2006 6:30:30 AM

is it really so surpising that AMD market share in the mobile sector in japan dropped out? AMD has had good processors... but it does not have a good platform solution like Intel's centrino platform which showed up somewhere in the middle of that period. Intel has always made and still makes better laptop technology. Part of the reason is because it makes its own chipsets/video/wifi/...you name it. What does AMD have to do? spit out a cpu then wait until someone starts supporting it. They clearly indicated that they want ATi to be competitive in the platform market. They didn't want to rely on other companies for support of their cpus. With ATi they can now coordinate their own competition to Intel's all around solutions.

IMO Intel beat them in Japan because they started shoving PIIIs and then Pentium Ms (essentially sidestepping the disastrous HeatBurst P4s) into laptops making for better, power efficient, coordinted solutions than the Athlon, allowing production of tiny laptops which the Japanese seem to love.

[yes this is a simple view of it, but do admit that Intel ushered in the era of good mobile solutions in that time period]
August 11, 2006 6:39:59 AM

"Intel's Worst Nightmare"


August 11, 2006 7:00:43 AM

Quote:
M$ did not invent the office suite, they didn't invent the word processor, they didn't invent the spreadsheet, and they sure as hell haven't contributed anything useful to the office application market.
They DID invent the WGA though........Ingenious, no? :wink:
August 11, 2006 7:01:07 AM

Yeah, just last month Intel did something like this over in europe....amd is taking them to court for it. Intel was paying the european company to not allow amd chips to be sold in that region.

Intel plays cheap.
At least AMD is honest.
August 11, 2006 7:07:05 AM

Quote:
Yeah, just last month Intel did something like this over in europe....amd is taking them to court for it. Intel was paying the european company to not allow amd chips to be sold in that region.

Intel plays cheap.
At least AMD is honest.
As far as you know. How many businesses do you really think are honest? Business is just like politics, and used-car sales....dishonesty is a necessity to thrive in these. :wink:
August 11, 2006 7:53:42 AM

Quote:
Your sig is 'priceless', what ever tiff you may have had with that gentleman, the quote is hysterically funny!


why thank you. i did think so as well, and luckily i wasn't the one engaging in rhetorical suicide for once. :wink:

also @turpit: the BM app --- hilarious --- :D 
August 11, 2006 8:27:31 AM

Lets face the truth, every biz mans dream is to monopolise the market, even the fish n chips man at the corner is dreaming of a day when everyone would come to him for fish n chips. BS lawsuite :!: :!:

Quote:
Consumers were hurt by being forced to use higher-priced, inferior technologies. (The touchstone of modern antitrust philosophy is that the law protects competition, not competitors; i.e., it is the consumer's welfare that matters, not AMD's.)


Completely Bull s**t, no one forced me to buy my chip and i dont need anyone to make a law suite for me.


Quote:
Intel's rebuttal line goes like this: Yes, Opteron's a great part, and-guess what?-it's selling. Moral: "When AMD has good parts, they do fine," as Intel's Sewell says. "When AMD has lousy parts, they don't do so well. That's what a competitive market is all about."


Eggs-actly :lol:  :lol: 

This is just the well too known case of a drowning man grabbing at floating straw.
August 11, 2006 9:30:40 AM

That old rant about Microsoft not inventing anything has grown really tiresome. Lots of companies have become successful with products they didn't "invent". Marketing is also a very large part of business. There have been lots of companies with lots of products that they didn't invent become very successful due to superior marketing. You don't have to give Microsoft (by the way, M$ is very tired and old, as well) any credit, that's your prerogative, but to single them out and rail against them for not being "inventors" makes little sense. You obviously dislike Microsoft, and that's also your prerogative. For sure, you don't have to buy or use any of their products. It's also your prerogative to know very little about business. Hopefully you drive only a Mercedes-Benz, since Karl Benz invented the automobile.
August 11, 2006 11:29:21 AM

ya keep dreaming my friend
August 11, 2006 11:53:09 AM

Quote:
If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today?


I'm sorry, I don't usually get nasty... but that is an incredibly ignorant statement. As for the rest of your post, it's also very misinformed.

You DO realize that Microsoft has done VERY LITTLE inventing in its history. M$ is good at stealing tech and then licensing when a court battle is on the horizon. They're also very good at buying companies they steal tech from as a way of "settling" lawsuits. The only thing M$ has that's worth a damn is an experienced and intelligent legal team.

M$ did not invent the office suite, they didn't invent the word processor, they didn't invent the spreadsheet, and they sure as hell haven't contributed anything useful to the office application market. For the past 10 years we've had the same farking office productivity software. Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint. And the ONLY thing that gotten progressively better is Outlook. Since Office 2000, M$ has gotten nowhere in terms of innovation. It's all the same shi*t. And there isn't a SINGLE thing that M$ office does that OpenOffice/StarOffice can't do. NOT ONE.

Ugh... I feel dumber having read your post. I usually just ignore retarded posts like yours... but for some reason I can't ignore this one. Not even BM is as ignorant as you are. Please, for the sake of everyone's IQ, please don't post here again.

Nothing else i can say other than....

OWNED!
August 11, 2006 12:02:15 PM

Quote:
If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today?


I'm sorry, I don't usually get nasty... but that is an incredibly ignorant statement. As for the rest of your post, it's also very misinformed.

You DO realize that Microsoft has done VERY LITTLE inventing in its history. M$ is good at stealing tech and then licensing when a court battle is on the horizon. They're also very good at buying companies they steal tech from as a way of "settling" lawsuits. The only thing M$ has that's worth a damn is an experienced and intelligent legal team.

M$ did not invent the office suite, they didn't invent the word processor, they didn't invent the spreadsheet, and they sure as hell haven't contributed anything useful to the office application market. For the past 10 years we've had the same farking office productivity software. Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint. And the ONLY thing that gotten progressively better is Outlook. Since Office 2000, M$ has gotten nowhere in terms of innovation. It's all the same shi*t. And there isn't a SINGLE thing that M$ office does that OpenOffice/StarOffice can't do. NOT ONE.

Ugh... I feel dumber having read your post. I usually just ignore retarded posts like yours... but for some reason I can't ignore this one. Not even BM is as ignorant as you are. Please, for the sake of everyone's IQ, please don't post here again.

Nothing else i can say other than....

OWNED!
:trophy:

At least we're all using it without paying. :)  It's not even revenge!

I don't even particularly like Microsoft's office suite, it seems to cluttered and unorganized. Little of it actually makes sense to your average Joe like me.
August 11, 2006 12:05:28 PM

Quote:
Ugh... I feel dumber having read your post. I usually just ignore retarded posts like yours... but for some reason I can't ignore this one. Not even BM is as ignorant as you are. Please, for the sake of everyone's IQ, please don't post here again.



Why don't you guys just get a room. You know you're just jealous of me. You won't see ME mention you in a thread you're not posting in.

Off the jock, you're cutting off the circulation.
August 11, 2006 12:11:39 PM

Quote:
My apologies for hijacking the thread.

Main Rig:

D930 @ 4.2
Corsair 2GB DDR2 XMS2-8500
7900gt @ 1.7v 780 Core and 2ghz Mem

I WANT SLI!!!!

You just need a 965P/975X board with two PEG PCIe 16x slots. Oh, andthe SLI bridge. Everything else is at software level.

975X can do it :D  shamino driver hacked it
August 11, 2006 12:14:50 PM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


For those 10-year-old fanboys out there that may not know (I posted this and before you added your sarcasm post) here's a definition...

MONOPOLY:
"Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly "

From: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/monopoly

By the strictest definition of the term, one doesn’t need to be a monopoly to be guilty of monopolistic practices.

Intel’s actions in the Japanese market is a case in point..
August 11, 2006 12:36:00 PM

heck..



i dont want BM to be my BOSS...



lol
August 11, 2006 12:37:00 PM

@wusy: I'm not paying for it. I'm not even using it.
OpenOffice.org can type, compute, data store, draw, HTML+CSS edit, PDF export, present slideshows, export in Flash, run off an USB stick - freely.

Damn, it just works and is updated constantly, for free! Why pay Microsoft cash? Answer: I just don't need to. Price: file a bug report online once in a while to see it fixed instead of paying for a technical support call where I'll be answered 'your bug might be fixed in the next version. No, you will have to pay full price for the next version and re-learn it' and then next version comes, your bug is called an always-on, built-in feature.

Microsoft didn't invent much for the consumer's benefit for quite a long time.

The only things that got better were in the field of programming tools, documentaton, programming APIs, and web servers. The first: they use them. The second: they need it due to their code bloat. The third: they were getting a lot of pressure from Java. The fourth: they were bent over with their pants down against Apache, PHP, mySQL and GNU/Linux and/or BSD - and still are.

Internet Explorer 7 still won't support real XHTML 1.0 (1999), while version 1.1 has been ratified in 2002. No, it doesn't support it since it is supported to be parsed as application/xhtml+xml (not text/html) and shouldn't require HTML4 syntax over XHTML10's. Mozilla/Firefox supported it since the standards came out.

It is fun to note that one of the most successful Microsoft software in consumer space these past few years was the Halo franchise, which is programmed by Bungie software (bought by Microsoft), and that some of the most notable parts in the games and movie are done using:
- sound: Ogg Vorbis. Does it mean Windows Media Audio isn't good enough?
- 3D rendering (movie's special effects): Linux clusters using OpenGL. Is Windows/DirectX not up to the task?

:lol: 
August 11, 2006 12:49:28 PM

So you use illegitimate proprietary software? Meaning you deal with bugs AND possible software editor's financial retaliation? You poor thing.
August 11, 2006 1:10:55 PM

Quote:
Yeah, just last month Intel did something like this over in europe....amd is taking them to court for it. Intel was paying the european company to not allow amd chips to be sold in that region.

Intel plays cheap.
At least AMD is honest.
As far as you know. How many businesses do you really think are honest? Business is just like politics, and used-car sales....dishonesty is a necessity to thrive in these. :wink:

Yes, im sure u want dishonest companies selling you your hardware. These types of actions affect the consumer, which is you by the way, into buying something extremely overpriced in the long run. (If monopolies had their way). EXAMPLE:$300 for an office suite? Get Real.
August 11, 2006 1:14:31 PM

I think Intel's worst nightmare probably involves a werewolf, a vehicle with no breaks and some shitty music by Fallout Boy or Hawthorne Heights. That's usually what mine are about.
August 11, 2006 1:18:19 PM

Quote:
I think Intel's worst nightmare probably involves a werewolf, a vehicle with no breaks and some shitty music by Fallout Boy or Hawthorne Heights. That's usually what mine are about.


Mine usually involve clowns & phone bills to the music of Cindy Lauperand for some reason the harder i run the slower i get. :D 
August 11, 2006 1:19:19 PM

Quote:
I think Intel's worst nightmare probably involves a werewolf, a vehicle with no breaks and some shitty music by Fallout Boy or Hawthorne Heights. That's usually what mine are about.


Mine usually involve clowns & phone bills to the music of Cindy Lauper. :D 
Clowns just wanna have fun?
August 11, 2006 1:39:14 PM

Quote:
"Intel's Worst Nightmare"


Classic. :lol: 
August 11, 2006 1:41:06 PM

Quote:
OK... i did some thinking. For the sake of argument, let's take 3 major technology segments and compare the innovation of each from the past 5 years. The comparison's will be made to Windows XP.

Since 2001, performance of desktop CPU's has quadrupled. We've gone from single core to dual core processors. Go compare a 1.4Ghz Thunderbird (which was the best processor in 2001) to a Athlon FX 62 in the CPU Charts on this site.

Since 2001, broadband speeds have also quadrupled. In 2001, the average DSL line speed was around 384kbps. The max was 640kbps in most areas. For Cable, AT&T Broadband had 1.5mbits. In 2006, we have DSL speeds well over 1mbits (some city has 10mbits now) and most major areas with cable internet are at 6mbits. Better yet, prices have either dropped or gone unchanged since 2001.

In 2001, most of us were talking on monochrome Nokia and Motorola phones. They were incapable of browsing the internet, incapable of playing MP3's, only a couple phones had cameras, and virtually all were incapable of doing anything except talking on. These days the majority of phones have cameras, EVDO, music capabilities, and a slew of other things. And let's not forget about the blackberry explosion.

In 2001, we had the GeForce 3 and the first ATI Radeon. On the 3DFX side we had the Voodoo3. Since then, graphics power has quadrupled. We went from video cards with 64MB of RAM to 512MB of RAM. and 256MB is standard these days. While I'm on the subject... we've gone from SDRAM that runs at 100mhz to 266Mhz (or 533Mhz DDR) standard in every machine. Hell, Athlon64's are at 400mhz (non-DDR) now! Bandwidth is through the roof.

In October 2001 we had Windows XP. In August 2006, we have... uhhh... Windows XP. And when is Vista coming? The latest I heard was a possible SECOND HALF release in 2007. At the earliest Vista won't be released until Jan 07, which seems very unlikely to me. 6 f'ing years for a new operating system. 6 years. I simply can't wrap my mind around it.

If this isn't a prime example of why a monopoly is bad, I don't know what is. It's ridiculous that the entire world is on hold for Operating System innovation. And why is it on hold? Because Microsoft has a god damned monopoly. You know damn well that if M$ had a company to compete against (like Intel has AMD), we'd would have been running Vista over 2 years ago. And let's not even get started on Internet Explorer. When was IE6 released? Oh yeah... back in 2001 too. Only when firefox threatens market share does M$ bother to do any serious work on IE7. Meanwhile we've got linux fighting for it's life and trying to tell the world "look at me, I'm better!" And it IS better. Linux has come such a long way since 2001. How far has Windows XP come since 2001? 2 service packs? Wow.

One more parallel- all the above mentioned tech segments (with the exception of OS's) are all very competitive.


^^One of the best posts I have read here.^^

Also, look at Vista. Look at all it was supposed to be and how much of that has been removed. If Microsoft had a real competitor (Apple doesn't count) it would be doing a lot better with Vista, or it would start to lose marketshare.
August 11, 2006 1:45:52 PM

Quote:
I think Intel's worst nightmare probably involves a werewolf, a vehicle with no breaks and some shitty music by Fallout Boy or Hawthorne Heights. That's usually what mine are about.


I read a top secret high-level internal Intel memo complaining about sand in the lube and ankle chafing.
August 11, 2006 2:27:57 PM

What I think is fascinating is the fact that very similar circumstances have arisen compared to late 2001. AMD has reached in zenith in market share, and Intel has released a new CPU that is superior and comparably priced. We will see over the next 18 months whether the situation plays out in a similar manner to 2002-2004. If AMD loses market share in a similar manner, then we can surmise the previous losses were legitimate. If, on the other hand, AMD stays strong, then we can assume that Intel did use predatory practices back then.

Not to disprove myself, but there may be some differences from this time around and last time around. For example, Sempron is a much stronger challenge to Celeron than.....I have no idea what the Celeron competition was then :oops:  . Also, AMD has a much stronger presence in the server market with Opteron, than they had back then.

In reference to StrangeStrangers question about whether a shop filled with AMD- and Intel-based system units would sell equally with unbiased salespeople, I don't think so. I think the Intel brand name is so strong, that uninformed people would buy them more than AMD. Unfortunately there is no way to test this hypothesis in the current marketplace.
August 12, 2006 12:36:39 AM

Quote:
Great article. Good find.

It is a little suspicious how AMD's 21% market share in 2001 suddenly just disappeared. At the time, AMD had very competitive products. It wasn't until the P4 Northwood that Intel had a processor that could compete with AMD's AthlonXP. Northwood was intro'd in mid 2003 if I remember correctly.

But Ruiz is right, the only thing stopping Intel from destroying AMD is this lawsuit. Intel has to be really careful in how it deals with OEM's until this lawsuit is settled; which won't be for at least a few more years...


In the end what will it change? Nothing.
Intel going to go belly up? Not plausible.
AMD going to get billions? Never.

Frankly I could care less what AMD thinks will come from this legal dispute. I personally think its crying wolf, with regards to the last 3 years, even when AMD had the market handed to them they failed to deliver technologies on time, this includes their pathetic attempt at 65nm production online, cumbersome implementation of 300mm wafers, 3 years and no revision to the K8(X2 doesn’t count), production ramping failures and yield overestimates. With 3 years of dominance they barely profited, and even now can't meet fiscal expectations.

As well they have failed to push the performance envelope, with no real clock speed increases to the K8, poor implementation of a DDR2 controller for the AM2 platform, which is essentially socket 940 but with no real performance, unless you buy ultra low latency DDR2 all to break even with the 939 platform on DDR. But when you look back at the last 3 years you see a reoccurring scenario of lack of innovation unless you honestly believe the X2 was an innovation in technology.

Then AMD has no product refresh and misses the very crucial product cycle with Intel. When you add it all up it simply shows AMD in unable to get all their ducks in a row, even when given ideal competition situations that was provided by Intel and the failed dream of Netburst. All in all I honestly can't see AMD delivering on their product cycle promises, process shift promises, or the refocus from the ATI acquisition promises, if there is a plausible scenario that will work in AMD's favor, someone should point it out.

In the end it changes nothing. Consider this, AMD processors and soon to be GPU's will be found in most major OEM's product line ups, then what? AMD has absolutely no production capacity, even with IBM and Chartered playing along as second fiddle. Then there is the issue of no on hand money for the storm that is approaching. With considerations that AMD has never come out on top, of any price war with Intel.

Then there is the lack of what I "coin" as long term survivability. With AMD trying to play "big" corporation, with the buy... I mean borrow money to buy out of ATI.

So I for one welcome AMD's, "lets go head to head with Intel in all their markets". We will all get to witness the dismantling of ATI, and watch AMD run in a brick wall.
August 12, 2006 12:48:12 AM

Quote:
If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today?


I'm sorry, I don't usually get nasty... but that is an incredibly ignorant statement. As for the rest of your post, it's also very misinformed.

You DO realize that Microsoft has done VERY LITTLE inventing in its history. M$ is good at stealing tech and then licensing when a court battle is on the horizon. They're also very good at buying companies they steal tech from as a way of "settling" lawsuits. The only thing M$ has that's worth a damn is an experienced and intelligent legal team.

M$ did not invent the office suite, they didn't invent the word processor, they didn't invent the spreadsheet, and they sure as hell haven't contributed anything useful to the office application market. For the past 10 years we've had the same farking office productivity software. Word, Excel, Outlook, and PowerPoint. And the ONLY thing that gotten progressively better is Outlook. Since Office 2000, M$ has gotten nowhere in terms of innovation. It's all the same shi*t. And there isn't a SINGLE thing that M$ office does that OpenOffice/StarOffice can't do. NOT ONE.

Ugh... I feel dumber having read your post. I usually just ignore retarded posts like yours... but for some reason I can't ignore this one. Not even BM is as ignorant as you are. Please, for the sake of everyone's IQ, please don't post here again.

Your right, to a point that is, Microsoft has made some very nice code since Windows 2000 debuted, such things that open source guys still can’t replicate. But there is also the small fact that everyone seems to miss, Microsoft has this little knack for making everything work and work well together.

But then there is the other point, the entire software industry is based of the replication, reverse engineering, or stealing of technologies or software “themes”. In fact that’s how it has been for about the last 15-20 years or so. So don’t go off chastising Microsoft when there are plenty of other lesser companies that have stolen, reverse engineered, and replicated software technologies and software “themes”.
August 12, 2006 12:50:36 AM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


For those 10-year-old fanboys out there that may not know (I posted this and before you added your sarcasm post) here's a definition...

MONOPOLY:
"Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly "

From: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/monopoly

By the strictest definition of the term, one doesn’t need to be a monopoly to be guilty of monopolistic practices.

Intel’s actions in the Japanese market is a case in point..

Yes we know how well Japanese resist America *cough* WW2 *cough*.
August 12, 2006 4:00:09 AM

Quote:
But but but! AMD bought a graphics chip company so that they could gain more market share THEY IS MONOPOLY TOO!

:?


You need to know the meaning of MONOPOLY :lol: 

Monopoly my butt. Just because a company is successful at making more money, like Dell, Microsoft and Intel, these companies would get a accused of monopoly because waahhhhh AMD wants a larger piece of the pie. If it wasn't for Microsoft, where would your office programs be today? Dell is very succesfully at selling computers and Intel has brought the computing industry this far. People complain about them being too big. They have boost the economy and provided 100K+ jobs for a lot of people. Their research have taken the industries in leaps and bounds. AMD suprise suprise did not get this far by themselves. Intel gave them licensing rights to copy Intels designs. AMD, just made in the last 2yrs a better processor with borrowed former Intel employees. Thus begins the competition. Stop pointing fingers and sit back and reap the rewards of better processors and cheaper prices. I knew Intel wasn't going to sit on their donkey forever and take it. Neither will AMD. They are just too small. They will need to grow with more resources. Putting more fabs will help them. Buying ATI right now was a stupid move especially with Intel success with the C2D. I don't think Intel is going to look back. AMD might be in trouble.

OK... i did some thinking. For the sake of argument, let's take 3 major technology segments and compare the innovation of each from the past 5 years. The comparison's will be made to Windows XP.

Since 2001, performance of desktop CPU's has quadrupled. We've gone from single core to dual core processors. Go compare a 1.4Ghz Thunderbird (which was the best processor in 2001) to a Athlon FX 62 in the CPU Charts on this site.

Since 2001, broadband speeds have also quadrupled. In 2001, the average DSL line speed was around 384kbps. The max was 640kbps in most areas. For Cable, AT&T Broadband had 1.5mbits. In 2006, we have DSL speeds well over 1mbits (some city has 10mbits now) and most major areas with cable internet are at 6mbits. Better yet, prices have either dropped or gone unchanged since 2001.

In 2001, most of us were talking on monochrome Nokia and Motorola phones. They were incapable of browsing the internet, incapable of playing MP3's, only a couple phones had cameras, and virtually all were incapable of doing anything except talking on. These days the majority of phones have cameras, EVDO, music capabilities, and a slew of other things. And let's not forget about the blackberry explosion.

In 2001, we had the GeForce 3 and the first ATI Radeon. On the 3DFX side we had the Voodoo3. Since then, graphics power has quadrupled. We went from video cards with 64MB of RAM to 512MB of RAM. and 256MB is standard these days. While I'm on the subject... we've gone from SDRAM that runs at 100mhz to 266Mhz (or 533Mhz DDR) standard in every machine. Hell, Athlon64's are at 400mhz (non-DDR) now! Bandwidth is through the roof.

In October 2001 we had Windows XP. In August 2006, we have... uhhh... Windows XP. And when is Vista coming? The latest I heard was a possible SECOND HALF release in 2007. At the earliest Vista won't be released until Jan 07, which seems very unlikely to me. 6 f'ing years for a new operating system. 6 years. I simply can't wrap my mind around it.

If this isn't a prime example of why a monopoly is bad, I don't know what is. It's ridiculous that the entire world is on hold for Operating System innovation. And why is it on hold? Because Microsoft has a god damned monopoly. You know damn well that if M$ had a company to compete against (like Intel has AMD), we'd would have been running Vista over 2 years ago. And let's not even get started on Internet Explorer. When was IE6 released? Oh yeah... back in 2001 too. Only when firefox threatens market share does M$ bother to do any serious work on IE7. Meanwhile we've got linux fighting for it's life and trying to tell the world "look at me, I'm better!" And it IS better. Linux has come such a long way since 2001. How far has Windows XP come since 2001? 2 service packs? Wow.

One more parallel- all the above mentioned tech segments (with the exception of OS's) are all very competitive.

Ignorant you are.

Would a company survive waiting on a company with limited supply when another is tons to make you a lot richer? You think about that. AMD is positioning themself today so they don't have that issue. But now, they will have to have better product then C2D. Athlon was a wake call for Intel and now they know that they can't afford to drag AMD along, they going to have to leave them in the dust with better designs. Intel does have the resource to do it. 103,000 employees is a lot of resources compare to 15,000 AMD employees. You have to play offense and not be on the defense. If you play enough capture the flag on HALO who see you don't win when stick around your fort and waiting for them to come. You can't win, you just get beaten down and you will lose the flag. I win everytime when my team use that strat.

Back when the Athlon was good, did you ever see one advertisement on TV about AMD? Absolutely nada, zelcho zero. Again, AMD was supply constraint. Intel took advantage of that with better advertisement.

Today, AMD buys ATI so they can again, copy Intel platform strategies.

Yes, those programs have been around but, they didn't really progress. I use these programs all the time for powerpoint and excel is awesome. If you really know the office programs, it will do wonders. Wordperfect was just a word processor and that's it. Boring.

I'll be waiting your know it all response. You are begining to sound llike BM. :p 
August 12, 2006 4:13:54 AM

Quote:
You are begining to sound llike BM. :p 


Them thars fightin words pardner :wink:


Peace
August 12, 2006 4:18:15 AM

Quote:
You are begining to sound llike BM. :p 


Them thars fightin words pardner :wink:


Peace

People post things without insight. Stupid if I say so.
August 12, 2006 5:02:32 AM

I WILL EAT YOUR BABIES AND POOP OUT YOUR SOUL!!!!!!111ONE
!