Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

A notion regarding current CPU availabilty

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 15, 2006 2:10:59 AM

Sitting here, reading the forum in order to avoid working, I came upon yet another "E6600 here..." thread. <<<Not bashing, I have nothing againts those threads, especially if they help people get what they want.>>> The question occured to me, as it has so many times over the past 2 weeks, 'where is the supply of these things?'

Core 2 was not a paper launch. Every day more people accross the globe are getting their hands on them. I dont believe X2 5000 was a paper launch either, but the process of getting these things into the hands of the consumers has been 'jerky' and painful. Several of the posters here at THG (myself included) have batted around the supply vs demand issue, concentrating on the supply side, as that is what the horde has been attacking with the paper launch BS

But is it really the supply?

Personally, I had been waiting since xmas for prices on the x2 3800 to drop below $200. They didnt. They didnt even go down until July 24. As I waited, news for Core 2 broke and I decided to wait some more. Then both AMDs and Intels July price cuts made the news, and I couldnt not wait even more.

We all saw Intels and AMDs sales for DT over the first 2Q of 06. Surely the pricing had something to do with that, but what about all the news of new CPUs and lower prices. In my case, the new CPUs and promise of lower prices made me hold off my purchase, but surely I was not alone in deciding to delay my purchase.

So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?

What do you think?

Peace
a c 457 à CPUs
August 15, 2006 2:50:02 AM

Quote:

So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?

What do you think?

Peace


I believe you are correct. I too was going to build an Athlon 64 X2 system, but then Intel released thier preliminary benchmarch for Conroe back in March (has it really been that long?). I was intrigued enough to hold off on my build despite the fact that the benchmarks could have been doctored, or at least very selective. I figured since my system is more than 4 years old I could wait a little longer.

Weeks and months passed as the Conroe hype built up. Simply by reading the post on this thread during that time you can easily see that many people were either waiting on Conroe benchmarks or the price cuts that they were expecting from AMD. Then the NDA expired an the benchmarks flooded the internet. To my surprise (and others too I'm sure) the reviews more or less confirmed the benchmarks that Intel initially released. Even MadModMike tossed in the towel and admitted that Conroe wasn't just all hype.

So that brings us today. The demand is definitely high for Conroe. The lower end CPUs are more or less readily available by now, but for people like me who wants the E6600 we gotta wait a little while longer. It's no surprise really 'cause lower end CPU are usually released first. Look at AMD's AM2 Athlons, only the slower models appeared initially, then the rest of the family started to appear. But if I remember correctly, I think Intel only has about 20% of it's capacity devoted to producing Core 2 Duo CPUs right now. Doesn't really help with the demand.

I only hope that I can get my hands on the Core 2 Duo E6600 before the end of the month since I did promise my cousin that I would give him my current PC an Athlon XP-M 2600+ with a Radeon 9800Pro.
August 15, 2006 3:33:45 AM

Quote:

So, is it possible, that the lack of supply is not the key factor right now? Is it possible that so many people decided to hold off purchases, that what we are seeing now is not normal demand, but excessive demand depleting supplies the instant they come available?

What do you think?

Peace


I believe you are correct. I too was going to build an Athlon 64 X2 system, but then Intel released thier preliminary benchmarch for Conroe back in March (has it really been that long?). I was intrigued enough to hold off on my build despite the fact that the benchmarks could have been doctored, or at least very selective. I figured since my system is more than 4 years old I could wait a little longer.

Weeks and months passed as the Conroe hype built up. Simply by reading the post on this thread during that time you can easily see that many people were either waiting on Conroe benchmarks or the price cuts that they were expecting from AMD. Then the NDA expired an the benchmarks flooded the internet. To my surprise (and others too I'm sure) the reviews more or less confirmed the benchmarks that Intel initially released. Even MadModMike tossed in the towel and admitted that Conroe wasn't just all hype.

So that brings us today. The demand is definitely high for Conroe. The lower end CPUs are more or less readily available by now, but for people like me who wants the E6600 we gotta wait a little while longer. It's no surprise really 'cause lower end CPU are usually released first. Look at AMD's AM2 Athlons, only the slower models appeared initially, then the rest of the family started to appear. But if I remember correctly, I think Intel only has about 20% of it's capacity devoted to producing Core 2 Duo CPUs right now. Doesn't really help with the demand.

I only hope that I can get my hands on the Core 2 Duo E6600 before the end of the month since I did promise my cousin that I would give him my current PC an Athlon XP-M 2600+ with a Radeon 9800Pro.


Yeah, only, allow me to clarify: Im not saying that the fabs are in all up production (we know they are not yet there) and supply is ample for normal demand.

Peace
Related resources
August 15, 2006 5:10:10 AM

Quote:
Nice post -- and very well presented concept of the landscape. I tend to agree. When the IDF benches came, then leaked benches, and buzz in the industry around Conroe, I believe it froze a number of purchasing decisions and contracted the precurement by whitebox and teir 1 OEMs.

This presented an industry imbalance, Intel suffered more from this as they stockpiled the inferior product at the time. C2D, while coming out as quickly as they can get it out, certainly shifted the market and, my opinion, is that there is a huge imbalance. On one side is the supply of the best product against it's demand, then there are the factors of current stock and the prices dropping by 50% or more. In one situation there is no demand, in others demand far outstrips supply.

I also agree with you on the 5000+, it was not a paper launch, but the natural distribution of a high speed bin coupled with a next day precipitous drop drove a dry up in supply over night (essentially).

What we see here, I believe, is a desire for high performance, and the demand is simply allowing the flux of new product introductions to drive the pricing points. I did not follow the DRAM market, and I am not sure if this was a similar situation... I doubt it because RAM is the lesser visable product within the PC. One thing is for sure, the CPU market is changing and we are standing near the fault line, feeling the initial tremors --- the earthquake (the big one) is still yet to come.

Jack


Yes, and it also presents Intel with an interesting descision to make.
If the OEMs hold out, as well as the retail consumers, for the newer CPUs, does Intel:

abandon their plan to clear the stock of P4/Netburst and try to write the losses off on taxes
or
continue to pursue that plan and lower prices further
or
Option 3???

Peace
August 15, 2006 5:12:14 AM

This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.

I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
August 15, 2006 5:20:25 AM

Quote:
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.

I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.
August 15, 2006 5:27:19 AM

Quote:
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.

I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.

I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)

PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.
August 15, 2006 5:31:17 AM

Quote:
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.

I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.

I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)

PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.No i won't. I don't want this to turn into another 13 page joke.
August 15, 2006 5:40:52 AM

Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.
August 15, 2006 5:44:24 AM

Quote:
This is a good question. C2D froze more sales of Intel than it did AMD, but the pricing and the anticipation dented AMD as well as AMD's inventory swelled in Q2 as well (Osbourne effect).

Intel has already taken charges on the inventory and now it is simply sitting on the books as dead weight, I can see them doing option 2 --- it continues to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. flushes inventory, gets it off the books, and puts more pressure on AMD in the area where AMD has always held supreme --- the low end.

I also believe Intel will stock pile a certain number to maintain their SIPP program. The other alternative is to start shoving them into the emerging set top box market (HD-DVD is currently using a low clocked P4). There is something to do with the stock, it is just doing it effectively.

AMD is in a different boat, with operating margins and net margins in the teens and sub 10 %, the bulk of their product line is now dragging ASPs low by the day. They are going to have a tough time maintaining those margins if they don't find a way to get pricing structure up. Right now, Opteron will help --- but in a quarter or two, enterprise contracts renewing to Woodcrest will start to show up in the market share. I think AMD is in for a few rough quarters.

Jack



Interesting, I didn’t know they were using P4s in set top HD-DVDs. That certainly seems a market to begin feeding excess inventory to, assuming the market grows to create a significant demand.

Pursuing the low end market is also very interesting. I have seen an increasing number of posts here recently cataloging low end P4 systems with 775 mobos. By the cheap P4 now, upgrade to Core 2 later strategy. Looks to be people who are tired of waiting for Core 2 or just enticed by the low cost P4's

I don’t know if AMD will be able to maintain their margins. I can’t see a way for them to drive pricing up in the near future, even though they desperately need to do so. But looking at the PDF Verndude linked to the other day (over in the notorious "gamers-Conroe" thread), AMD seems to have a very aggressive plan for the next few years. If they can pull of the R&D on the time table they have established for themselves, and they don’t loose too much of the gains they have recently made, they look to be a very strong competitor in 2008.
That’s a lot of "ifs". It will also be interesting to see where the OEM market goes with AMD. With the sudden increase in demand for AMD by the OEMs, and the limited number of Fabs AMD has, I can’t help but wonder if the OEMs will experience significant AMD shortages. I don’t think it will take the OEMs that long to become disenchanted with AMD if AMD cannot meet the OEMs product demands.

On another note, I wonder if Intel realized what they were going to do to the sales of P4/Netburst when they started hyping Core 2. I would not want to be the Intel executive who misread that one.

Peace
August 15, 2006 5:53:58 AM

Quote:
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.


Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.

However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.

I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.

Jack

Very true. I won't mention anything else about intel vs. amd because i'm tired of argueing and have accepted taht it doesn't matter what is logical or what you or i think, because people will still by what they want.

BTW how do we get that other thread locked without me getting banned?
August 15, 2006 5:55:39 AM

Quote:
This is very true as I was going to buy a s939 system back around February and just before i was going to buy it the conroe stuff started, and the AM2 stuff had already made me think about waiting. Now i'm getting an AM2 system after waiting longer for the price drops. I'm also waiting again for the x1950xt possibly, although by now my P2 has been making me angry for years, and enough is enough.

I would also like to add that the excessive demand combined with normal demand PLUS the back to school rush have made probably the highest demand in a long time if not history for processors.
BS. You're just getting AM2 because you think C2d is overkill for gaming.

I'm getting it because the midrange AM2' perform about the same the low range conroes, but i believe AM2 will have a much longer lifespan than current intel boards allowing me to upgrade later to an AM3 cpu, which i explained OOHHH so many times in my other thread. 8)

PS. and yess any high end (e6600, 6700, 6800, FX-62) is overkill for gaming if you care about money, and value. Now i know you'll say "e6600 is best price/performance, but its also out of many people's price ranges.

We talked about watching the way you word things. Dont confuse overkill, i.e. excessive power, with overly expensive.

The E6600 hardly falls into the FX 62/E6700/6800EE in terms of price. Yes, its more expensive than a X2 3800, but no nearly so much as the FX 62 or 6800EE.


Peace
August 15, 2006 5:56:24 AM

Quote:
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.


Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.

However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.

I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.

Jack

Me too. Well, I get free CPUs, so I guess it's incentive to stay on one platform, no matter how bad my systems were compared to others. But my systems usually costed me a motherboard, memory, and a video card.

For the C2D system, I am actually upgrading my RAM speed to DDR2 800 and maybe a 7900 or x1900 card, along with a 975x motherboard. So, I have a built price around $400-500 bucks. Depending how much longer I wait to order parts.

To stay on topic:

I think turpit stated the situation quite well. Very nicely done.
August 15, 2006 5:57:54 AM

Quote:
Not really. Even with some features turned off and the RAm problem, AM3 processors will probably still be better than any AM2 processors at the time. I'm mainly looking at just prolonging the lifespan of the rig. Now conroe may turn out to be very upgradeable but based on the track records of both companies i'm more inclined to go the AMD route.


Good point, I am not really arguing with you on this item--- socket compatibility is a huge selling point and AMD is certainly better than Intel is in this regard no question.

However, some people like the latest and greatest, my point --- I use the CPU refresh to also refresh my MB and RAM --- it is an expense I plan on and accept as part of being an enthusiast. As such, socket compatibility is important to some and inconsequential to others.

I personally have other reasons than just performance for staying Intel. I will not go into detail.

Jack

Very true. I won't mention anything else about intel vs. amd because i'm tired of argueing and have accepted taht it doesn't matter what is logical or what you or i think, because people will still by what they want.

BTW how do we get that other thread locked without me getting banned?

Wrong. When it came time to buy, I wanted the X2 5000. I bought the 6600. Why? Availability and price.

Peace
August 15, 2006 6:04:04 AM

Wrong about what? People buying what they want?
August 15, 2006 6:07:31 AM

Quote:
Actually, I think they should also retire the Celeron name, let P4s take the very low end and eventually phase those out with the E4000s. My advice anyway.
I agree Jack, Celeron has always been associated with cheap/slow. Just as AMD retired the Duron name to be replaced by Sempron, so should Intel...and have a fresh lineup (name-wise) from top to bottom.
August 15, 2006 6:19:47 AM

Quote:

Yep, it is nothing more than a P4-M with a USB thumb drive with Linux ---
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Apr/bch2006042003...

Does it seem strange that Intel so strongly embraces HD DVD --- this is actually a VIIV platform, 'hidden' as a set top DVD player.


Nope, not strange at all. I've just had my head so far up my arse on the Core 2 issue, I havent been paying attention to any other tech for the past 6 months.

Quote:
This dimwit actually tried to hack the USB drive:
http://geekswithblogs.net/lorint/archive/2006/04/21/757...


Hope he was not working out of pocket


Quote:
Actually, I think they should also retire the Celeron name, let P4s take the very low end and eventually phase those out with the E4000s. My advice anyway.


Noted. Sounds like the intelligent way for them to go.

Quote:
They knew --- it was a calculated gamble, Intel if it is anything is full of bean counters. Essentially, they were willing to bite the inventory, undercut their own product to put hurt on AMD---Intel does not want AMD to expand, if this happens then one of two things must happen, Intel must allow AMD 30% or better market share, or drive AMD into oblivion as 15% MSS is not enough to sustain 2 fabs let alone 3. AMD is shooting for the stars, Intel is trying to tie a rope around the rocket to stop it from taking off.

Intel needs AMD to survive, otherwise FTC, ATC, and EUTC will bust them up for sure, but they do not want to share too much of the pie. Intel is in between a rock and a hard place in my opinion.



Funny, I was dicussing this in another thread with corvetteguy. "Intel could price AMD out of business" Wouldnt it be an amusing twist of fate if Intel was ordered to subsidize AMD? Time will tell. Of course, if old Billy Gates has his way, there should be enough market for both companies with the specialized system crap MS is pushing.

I've seen a lot of people enthused over Vista and the prospects of GPU on CPU die. I dont think they realize that this has the potential to lead to having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now. If this does come to pass, it will certainly be a boon for both AMD and Intel. Not so much for we consumers though.

Peace
August 15, 2006 6:21:39 AM

Quote:
Wrong about what? People buying what they want?


Yup


Peace
August 15, 2006 6:27:00 AM

Quote:
Wrong about what? People buying what they want?


Yup


Peace

I thought that was your whole point against me in the other thread. People will buy what they want, and if that means high end so be it. I can understand your e6600 purchase, but availability isn't always an issue.

Anyway i'm going to bed now. Goodnight :wink:
August 15, 2006 6:38:41 AM

Quote:
Wrong about what? People buying what they want?


Yup


Peace

I thought that was your whole point against me in the other thread. People will buy what they want, and if that means high end so be it. I can understand your e6600 purchase, but availability isn't always an issue.

Anyway i'm going to bed now. Goodnight :wink:

Maybe you come from a rich family, I dont know, but if not, your in for a hard lesson in life:

Want vs Need

I want a new car. Ive never owned one and doubt I ever will. I've always bought used. Why? Money. A new car depreciates by almost 1/3 to 1/2 moments after is driven off the lot. Buy a 1 year old car at 1/2 the sticker price and pay the $130 to transfer the warrenty. The want of new vs the need to economize.

I want a $10000 E6800 system. I cant justify paying that when I dont need it. I had decided, after much debate on the X2 5000. I bought the E6600 after I couldnt find a reasonably priced 5000. The want of the fastest system money could buy vs the need to replace a dying computer now.

I NEED a F4U Corsair. They cost $800000 to $1.4 mil in flying condition. How can I afford that if I piss my money away on things I want but dont need? :wink:

Peace
August 15, 2006 6:44:08 AM

THAT WAS MY ENTIRE POINT IN THE OTHER THREAD :!:

No i'm not rich thats why i still have this crap P2.

Oh well, i'm putting that thread behind me and going to bed. :wink:
August 15, 2006 6:45:54 AM

Quote:
THAT WAS MY ENTIRE POINT IN THE OTHER THREAD :!:

No i'm not rich thats why i still have this crap P2.

Oh well, i'm putting that thread behind me and going to bed. :wink:


A P2? Honestly? errrr....Sorry dude


Peace
August 15, 2006 6:57:01 AM

Quote:
I've seen a lot of people enthused over Vista and the prospects of GPU on CPU die. I dont think they realize that this has the potential to lead to having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now. If this does come to pass, it will certainly be a boon for both AMD and Intel. Not so much for we consumers though.
Peace


How, exactly, can adding a GPU as an extra core on a CPU die lead to us having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now? If anything it seems like it would save consumers money if AMD/Intel/Somebody could integrate GPU into a CPU core. Am I missing something?
August 15, 2006 7:12:50 AM

Quote:
I've seen a lot of people enthused over Vista and the prospects of GPU on CPU die. I dont think they realize that this has the potential to lead to having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now. If this does come to pass, it will certainly be a boon for both AMD and Intel. Not so much for we consumers though.
Peace


How, exactly, can adding a GPU as an extra core on a CPU die lead to us having to buy multiple PCs (or PC based products) to accomplish what one PC can do now? If anything it seems like it would save consumers money if AMD/Intel/Somebody could integrate GPU into a CPU core. Am I missing something?

Marketing and Bill Gates old "Grand Plan" for the computer integrated lifestyle of the future.
Why sell the consumer one PC when you can sell them 5?
One for internet/email/comunications
One for video/audio entertainment
One for gaming
One for home systems/security
I've forgotton what the 5th one was.

MS Intel and AMD really dont want to save you money. More money in your pocket means less in theirs. Thats not evil or anything, its just smart business.

Specialization will force that. There are a lot of issues (some of which people have examined here in the forums) with putting a GPU on die with a CPU. One of the ones I tend to favor is it will decrease costs, but also decrease performance, in terms of video editing/3d graphics rendering/gaming. Couple this with a tiered or specialized OS, and force the to buy multiple machines.

This is not fact. I am not stating it as such. It is suppostion, based on Bill Gates "vision" coupled with potential trends in CPU/GPU R&D, PLUS the fact that companies are in business to make money, not save money for the consumer.

Peace
August 15, 2006 7:13:36 AM

Quote:
Wrong about what? People buying what they want?


Yup


Peace

I thought that was your whole point against me in the other thread. People will buy what they want, and if that means high end so be it. I can understand your e6600 purchase, but availability isn't always an issue.

Anyway i'm going to bed now. Goodnight :wink:

Maybe you come from a rich family, I dont know, but if not, your in for a hard lesson in life:

Want vs Need

I want a new car. Ive never owned one and doubt I ever will. I've always bought used. Why? Money. A new car depreciates by almost 1/3 to 1/2 moments after is driven off the lot. Buy a 1 year old car at 1/2 the sticker price and pay the $130 to transfer the warrenty. The want of new vs the need to economize.

I want a $10000 E6800 system. I cant justify paying that when I dont need it. I had decided, after much debate on the X2 5000. I bought the E6600 after I couldnt find a reasonably priced 5000. The want of the fastest system money could buy vs the need to replace a dying computer now.

I NEED a F4U Corsair. They cost $800000 to $1.4 mil in flying condition. How can I afford that if I piss my money away on things I want but dont need? :wink:

PeaceCars are the biggest waste of money known to modern man....with the exception of getting stoned/ drinking.(The booze/drug buzz depreciates faster than car prices). I've bought a few new cars in my life, and i will never do it again-unless i win the lottery.

PS...I'm not anti-partying. :wink:
August 16, 2006 3:01:01 AM

Quote:

Marketing and Bill Gates old "Grand Plan" for the computer integrated lifestyle of the future.
Why sell the consumer one PC when you can sell them 5?
One for internet/email/comunications
One for video/audio entertainment
One for gaming
One for home systems/security
I've forgotton what the 5th one was.

MS Intel and AMD really dont want to save you money. More money in your pocket means less in theirs. Thats not evil or anything, its just smart business.

Specialization will force that. There are a lot of issues (some of which people have examined here in the forums) with putting a GPU on die with a CPU. One of the ones I tend to favor is it will decrease costs, but also decrease performance, in terms of video editing/3d graphics rendering/gaming. Couple this with a tiered or specialized OS, and force the to buy multiple machines.

This is not fact. I am not stating it as such. It is suppostion, based on Bill Gates "vision" coupled with potential trends in CPU/GPU R&D, PLUS the fact that companies are in business to make money, not save money for the consumer.

Peace


Yeah, you really have Bill Gates figured out. It makes sense that he's retiring and giving a bunch of money to the gates foundation (which is all about "all lives having equal value" and whatnot) because he's actually a mastermind that is controlling the future of PCs as we know them! And why is that? Just so he can line AMD and Intel's pockets an screw poor helpless consumers!

(BTW, anybody that says I'm sarcastic is crazy).

Anyway, the good news is: I don't think you have anything to worry about. As soon as some big company really does try to work people over, there is always an open-source project baying at their door that will offer everything wrapped into one solution for free. If it really comes to that, some open source project somewhere would eat Windows alive.

These days everything is about integrating more and more into a single device, not segregating things even further (see MP3 player/cell phone/internet/messaging devices, monitors with component inputs, PDA/Laptop hybrids, etc.).
August 16, 2006 4:31:32 AM

Quote:
Core 2 was not a paper launch.


Coming into another thread late as usual...

Along the lines of supply and demand, I've been wondering about Core 2 since the first benchmarks were released. I sort of assumed that Conroe would be difficult to get for a while after launch. Most strong performers are. But I'm used to seeing the supply and demand pattern. Prices start high and supply is short. If you shop around, you see some product, then you see product go out of stock. Eventually, the eager buyers get their stuff and product stays in stock longer after each shipment. Then the price drops begin. So what I'm wondering is this: when will we first see the 6600 and 6700 be in stock most of the time at most online retailers?
August 16, 2006 4:50:44 AM

Quote:
Wrong. When it came time to buy, I wanted the X2 5000. I bought the 6600. Why? Availability and price.

Peace


Funny, I got the 4800+ over the 6600 for the exact same reason. :wink:

Another point I haven't seen mentioned in the discussion is platform maturity. Somehow I think I'll be far less aggrivated with my latest revision (uber stable) A8N32-SLI than with one of the 3 or 4 rev 1.x C2D boards available at launch. I was unfortunate enough to end up with a A7N8X 1.4 rev board a long time ago because I jumped into the platform too soon. I'm all for early adopting, but being able to make a bios change without killing the MB is worth waiting a while for more mature boards to be designed. Intel isn't exactly known for making crappy boards, but also first issue boards aren't known for being particularly suited to system stability. You think software vendors are the only ones getting paid for issuing beta products!? Ha! Keep your C2D. I'll pick one up in a while when the prices are better, the hardware is more diverse, and you know you're not being shafted with a 1.13Ghz "revolution". :wink:
August 16, 2006 5:39:44 AM

Quote:

Marketing and Bill Gates old "Grand Plan" for the computer integrated lifestyle of the future.
Why sell the consumer one PC when you can sell them 5?
One for internet/email/comunications
One for video/audio entertainment
One for gaming
One for home systems/security
I've forgotton what the 5th one was.

MS Intel and AMD really dont want to save you money. More money in your pocket means less in theirs. Thats not evil or anything, its just smart business.

Specialization will force that. There are a lot of issues (some of which people have examined here in the forums) with putting a GPU on die with a CPU. One of the ones I tend to favor is it will decrease costs, but also decrease performance, in terms of video editing/3d graphics rendering/gaming. Couple this with a tiered or specialized OS, and force the to buy multiple machines.

This is not fact. I am not stating it as such. It is suppostion, based on Bill Gates "vision" coupled with potential trends in CPU/GPU R&D, PLUS the fact that companies are in business to make money, not save money for the consumer.
Peace


Yeah, you really have Bill Gates figured out. It makes sense that he's retiring and giving a bunch of money to the gates foundation (which is all about "all lives having equal value" and whatnot) because he's actually a mastermind that is controlling the future of PCs as we know them! And why is that? Just so he can line AMD and Intel's pockets an screw poor helpless consumers!

(BTW, anybody that says I'm sarcastic is crazy).

Anyway, the good news is: I don't think you have anything to worry about. As soon as some big company really does try to work people over, there is always an open-source project baying at their door that will offer everything wrapped into one solution for free. If it really comes to that, some open source project somewhere would eat Windows alive.

These days everything is about integrating more and more into a single device, not segregating things even further (see MP3 player/cell phone/internet/messaging devices, monitors with component inputs, PDA/Laptop hybrids, etc.).

Dude, where did you this stuff from? Who are you responding to? Me? If so, you really have some issues.

Let’s go back and start at the begining

First, please actually read the post. All of it. It’s not very long

A) You will note I said it is NOT fact. I clearly stated that it is supposition.

Quote:
This is not fact. I am not stating it as such. It is suppostion, based on Bill Gates "vision" coupled with potential trends in CPU/GPU R&D, PLUS the fact that companies are in business to make money, not save money for the consumer.


Supposition: (noun) idea, guess, theory, possibility, hypothesis, deduction.

So putting that all together now, what I said was it was a guess (see 'supposition'), based on Bill Gates “Vision” for the technologically integrated home of the future (which I am still trying to find a link to) coupled with the trend of tech R&D plus the fact that the purpose of a company (note I did not write non profit organization) is to make money

B) What does Bill retiring and donating money have to do with the topic? I think I’m missing your point here. Are you attempting to imply that Gates is a humanitarian who cares nothing for money, and as such has no interest in extracting it from consumer’s pockets?
If this is what you were trying to say (I could be wrong) and Bill doesn’t care about money, then why not simply provide everyone with free copies of the Windows OS, Office suite and the rest of the software MS produces ?
Were you implying that I stated Bill Gates is evil? I believe I said:
Quote:
Thats not evil or anything, its just smart business.


C)
Quote:
Anyway, the good news is: I don't think you have anything to worry about. As soon as some big company really does try to work people over, there is always an open-source project baying at their door that will offer everything wrapped into one solution for free. If it really comes to that, some open source project somewhere would eat Windows alive.


Well, I wish this would hurry up and happen. Open sources track record (with the masses) against Windows doesn’t have a whole lot of tick marks in the “win” column, under the most used applications “league” and it doesn’t look to be building a “winning team” any time soon.

D)
Quote:
These days everything is about integrating more and more into a single device, not segregating things even further (see MP3 player/cell phone/internet/messaging devices, monitors with component inputs, PDA/Laptop hybrids, etc.).


Why do you think this is? Is it to save your “poor helpless consumers” much needed storage space? Is it the selfness nature of commercial enterprise to improve the human condition by providing the “poor helpless consumers” with inexpensive electronics?

Ask yourself this: Do you honestly believe, that every tech-oriented corporation out there including MS Intel AMD IBM MM/GE etc are all striving to provide the “poor helpless consumers” as you called them with a $5 dollar super navi-musi-video-cell-RCA DVI pocket computer? Be honest now, do you really believe this? How long do you think these companies will stay in business once everyone has one of these? Do you believe this would put the companies out of business?

Oh, by the way, explain to me how the "$5 dollar super navi-musi-video-cell-RCA DVI pocket computer" relates to the household computer market other than plug in or wireless intefaces for downloading and compatability sales pitches? (if you actually read the links I posted, you may see)

E) Bill Gates Visions
<<<these are just a couple, as THG drives don’t have enough space to store all of the predictions and statements form ole’ Billie’s press releases, and it would take a team of people a lifetime to sort through everything the man has said.>>>

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-984331.html

Note the 'fighting for sales section'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2487787.stm

This one breaks down some of his visions as laid down in print tens years ago, as compared to the reality of today
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2005/...


E1)Trends
Its late, I have to get some sleep before work, so Im only going to link to this, as it was the fastest to get to. This was just posted by Verndewd a day ago:
http://www.ati.com/companyinfo/about/AMD_ATI_Investor_P...

Look at page ten. Systems in R&D are begining to diverge, not converge.


Peace

On a lighter note, for everyone’s enjoyment, check out this short little list of computing predictions. Out of date, but still fun!

'I think there is a world market for maybe five computers'
Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'While a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 10000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers of the future may have only 1000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons.'
Popular mechanics, 1949

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'I have travelled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year'
Editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'But what... is it good for?'
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems division of IBM, commenting on the microchip, 1968

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'There is no reason why anyone would want a computer in the home'
Ken Olson, Present, Chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corporation, 1977

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'640K should be enough for anybody'
Bill Gates, 1981


The last one is really interesting, as many web sites and bloggers have reported it as being a "confirmed" urban legend, i.e. Gates never said it, while other site have posted contradictory evidence that not only did Gates say it, but when later called on the poor prediction, he admitted he was mistaken.
August 16, 2006 5:51:14 AM

Quote:

Funny, I was dicussing this in another thread with corvetteguy. "Intel could price AMD out of business" Wouldnt it be an amusing twist of fate if Intel was ordered to subsidize AMD? Time will tell. Of course, if old Billy Gates has his way, there should be enough market for both companies with the specialized system crap MS is pushing.

Peace


This is also funny --- 6 months ago, probably post number 37, I was getting into it with MadModMike, and I stated a "what if scenario", that Intel using Core 2 Duo, and excess inventory simply priced AMD into oblivion. I actually came up with 3 basic options:

1. Intel gets busted up.
2. Before going belly up, AMD gets bought out --- likely candidate IBM.
3. FTC/JTC etc etc forces Intel to share manufact. tech, resrouces, and money to keep AMD afloat.

You and I ironically think number 3 is a hoot :)  ....

I don't believe we would ever reach that point, AMD has some strong momentum going...

Jack


You know, now that you mention it, I have a vague recollection of that "debate".

Yeah, AMD does have momentum, and their plans for 2008 look very promising. Lets hope their 2007 stop gaps have enough "force" to keep them rolling. Lots of variables right now. Lots of hatched plans growing, and plans incubating.


Peace
August 16, 2006 5:56:14 AM

Quote:
Wrong. When it came time to buy, I wanted the X2 5000. I bought the 6600. Why? Availability and price.

Peace


Funny, I got the 4800+ over the 6600 for the exact same reason. :wink:

Another point I haven't seen mentioned in the discussion is platform maturity. Somehow I think I'll be far less aggrivated with my latest revision (uber stable) A8N32-SLI than with one of the 3 or 4 rev 1.x C2D boards available at launch. I was unfortunate enough to end up with a A7N8X 1.4 rev board a long time ago because I jumped into the platform too soon. I'm all for early adopting, but being able to make a bios change without killing the MB is worth waiting a while for more mature boards to be designed. Intel isn't exactly known for making crappy boards, but also first issue boards aren't known for being particularly suited to system stability. You think software vendors are the only ones getting paid for issuing beta products!? Ha! Keep your C2D. I'll pick one up in a while when the prices are better, the hardware is more diverse, and you know you're not being shafted with a 1.13Ghz "revolution". :wink:

Platform maturity was the reason I wanted to go with the X2 5000 over the E6600. I was very interested in the E6600, but I didnt want to be a Core 2 "Test Pilot", and deal with the issues you listed.

Peace
August 16, 2006 6:10:00 AM

Holy CRAP turpit, thats the LONGEST pwning i've ever seen, i think you may even have beat jack. Teaches Dean to not read the whole poat though so really good job. :wink:
August 16, 2006 7:20:10 AM

Quote:
I believe you are correct. I too was going to build an Athlon 64 X2 system, but then Intel released thier preliminary benchmarch for Conroe back in March (has it really been that long?). I was intrigued enough to hold off on my build despite the fact that the benchmarks could have been doctored, or at least very selective. I figured since my system is more than 4 years old I could wait a little longer.

Weeks and months passed as the Conroe hype built up. Simply by reading the post on this thread during that time you can easily see that many people were either waiting on Conroe benchmarks or the price cuts that they were expecting from AMD. Then the NDA expired an the benchmarks flooded the internet. To my surprise (and others too I'm sure) the reviews more or less confirmed the benchmarks that Intel initially released. Even MadModMike tossed in the towel and admitted that Conroe wasn't just all hype.

So that brings us today. The demand is definitely high for Conroe. The lower end CPUs are more or less readily available by now, but for people like me who wants the E6600 we gotta wait a little while longer. It's no surprise really 'cause lower end CPU are usually released first. Look at AMD's AM2 Athlons, only the slower models appeared initially, then the rest of the family started to appear. But if I remember correctly, I think Intel only has about 20% of it's capacity devoted to producing Core 2 Duo CPUs right now. Doesn't really help with the demand.
Holy crap! Intelligent discussion! Quick, some idiot ruin it!

I believe that this is precisely the case.

Permit me to use an analogy/metaphor, if you will. Conroe is an excellent CPU, just like the game Halo 2 is a good game. Both are excellent products. Both would have sold well without hype. But that right there is the deciding factor. Hype. It is inevitable. When a company creates a good product, they will milk it for everything that it is worth by hyping it.

Both are good products, but you cannot deny that both are also hyped to the maximum.
August 16, 2006 7:44:32 AM

Quote:
Holy crap! Intelligent discussion! Quick, some idiot ruin it!

I believe that this is precisely the case.

Permit me to use an analogy/metaphor, if you will. Conroe is an excellent CPU, just like the game Halo 2 is a good game. Both are excellent products. Both would have sold well without hype. But that right there is the deciding factor. Hype. It is inevitable. When a company creates a good product, they will milk it for everything that it is worth by hyping it.

Both are good products, but you cannot deny that both are also hyped to the maximum.
OK...I will. :wink: If C2D is an excellent CPU, then i wouldn't say that what they did was "hype". To me, hype is used to exaggerate, or even BS about a processors performance, and for the most part, C2D is living up to what Intel "promised". I agree that they did send out lots of ES's to the "right" sites and/or enthusiasts(Coolaler,FCG,etc.),and did a few public demonstrations...but under no circumstances is that "dirty", "unfair", "monopolistic behaviour", or anything other than smart marketing. :wink:
August 16, 2006 12:18:34 PM

I think that's an interesting premise. It applies accurately to enthusiasts and people who are aware of developments in processor technology and platform.

I am not altogether sure that the enthusiast market alone could account for a shortage in supply, unless of course that’s just in 'retail' chips. If it is in retail chips (and we discount OEMs) then, considering that the Intel products were hugely publicised and enormously anticipated, it seems a bit of a strange decision to have less available than demand might meet, even considering people who did not opt for a performance system earlier who may indeed have created an unexpected high.

Stocks don't appear to be very short here in the UK. Of course your premise could mean there are less enthusiasts anticipating new builds here and so supply in effect meets that demand. If this is the case then the enthusiasts bought out all the Intel argument applies regionally. But does that hold water I wonder? Did enthusiasts in the US market cause a drop in supply because of their delays in system building but, inexplicably, enthusiasts in the UK (for example) behaved completely differently and did not wait at all? Or was the supply of chips in the first place insufficient to meet demand anyway?

I am fairly sure that if all of us stopped one person on the street and asked them what Core2Duo or Conroe or indeed AMD2 was only a very small number of people would know (factoring in we might get locked up and never finish the survey :)  ). I imagine many of those people would actually own a PC though. They are pretty unlikely to have delayed a new purchase on the grounds of anticipated technology.

Just in my view, from what I have read, but I tend to think the enthusiast demand is one aspect of the supply issue but one among others including Intel wanting to shift some of its current stock by managing the market.

Of course the other point one can make is we are not actually seeing a 'shortage' in the context of the overall capacity of Intel to produce Conroe chips for people that want them - we are seeing that, in some countries, these chips are hard to obtain for enthusiasts but available from system builders..as system builders probably shift more chips perhaps there really were just not enough to meet enthusiast demand in the first place, whether people had delayed building or not. Is the priority for Intel the market that posts on these forums or Joe Bloggs ordering a PC who really doesn't know much about what's inside it? If there was a target number of chips and manufacture fell behind (not saying it did) who would get priority..I suspect OEM manufacturers would.

This is not to bash Intel, nor underestimate their intelligence or indeed manufacturing capacity, simply to debate the issue. I think in some places demand for these chips is outweighing supply. But I am not sure that was unforeseeable in the enthusiast market. One thing is for sure is that if people are prepared to wait they will get the chip they want. And if they waited and didn’t go for 939 etc then waiting a little longer seems to be causing a disproportionate amount of anger for those vocal enough to post about it.
a c 457 à CPUs
August 16, 2006 2:20:43 PM

Quote:
Holy crap! Intelligent discussion! Quick, some idiot ruin it!

I believe that this is precisely the case.

Permit me to use an analogy/metaphor, if you will. Conroe is an excellent CPU, just like the game Halo 2 is a good game. Both are excellent products. Both would have sold well without hype. But that right there is the deciding factor. Hype. It is inevitable. When a company creates a good product, they will milk it for everything that it is worth by hyping it.

Both are good products, but you cannot deny that both are also hyped to the maximum.


Intel certianly created the hype around Conroe. But in the end the hype turned out to be true (more or less) so the hype has been transformed into fact where a relatively inexpensive Conroe E6600 can beat the Athlon FX-62 at stock speed.

AMD on the other hand didn't really make any hype about socket AM2. They did state that one of the features will be support for DDR2 RAM and that started to create a buzz in the enthusiast community. People were estatic about DDR2 RAM thinking that it will provide a serious performance boost and it snowballed into hype created by the community. This occured despite the fact that in a DailyTech article AMD stated under the best circumstances there will be little if any performance gains between socket AM2 and 939 of the same CPU model.

It was no surprise when newbies posted threads bashing AMD for "lying" about the performance increase of the AM2 platform. They fell under the influence of the hype created by the enthusiast community.
August 17, 2006 1:36:08 AM

Quote:
Holy crap! Intelligent discussion! Quick, some idiot ruin it!

I believe that this is precisely the case.

Permit me to use an analogy/metaphor, if you will. Conroe is an excellent CPU, just like the game Halo 2 is a good game. Both are excellent products. Both would have sold well without hype. But that right there is the deciding factor. Hype. It is inevitable. When a company creates a good product, they will milk it for everything that it is worth by hyping it.

Both are good products, but you cannot deny that both are also hyped to the maximum.
OK...I will. :wink: If C2D is an excellent CPU, then i wouldn't say that what they did was "hype". To me, hype is used to exaggerate, or even BS about a processors performance, and for the most part, C2D is living up to what Intel "promised". I agree that they did send out lots of ES's to the "right" sites and/or enthusiasts(Coolaler,FCG,etc.),and did a few public demonstrations...but under no circumstances is that "dirty", "unfair", "monopolistic behaviour", or anything other than smart marketing. :wink:

Tanker,

You have a valid point, but I know when I think of the past seven months, I don’t just think of the tech site reviews, but also the trade shows where Intel setup up demo systems for comparative purposes. I remember the rukus they caused in the forums here with MMM jumping all over them screaming that the benchmarks were “cooked”, and the AMD systems Intel was using were “dumbed” down. If I recall correctly, even some of the more reputable posters at THG raised their eyebrows at the way some of these were demos were setup and run. Even now, though I don’t remember the details, I still have a funny taste in my mouth from that stuff.

What exactly is hype? Looking through my quick ref at Hype:
Hype (noun) publicity, propaganda, buildup, hard sell
Hype (Adjective) Advertise, buildup, plug, push
So, hype can be used both in a positive and negative light

Personally, I agree with you that there is a clear distinction between advertising and “hyping”. I agree that the test, benchmark and trade show demo results verified Intel’s claims. But even though the trade show demo comparisons also proved to be true, I still have the impression that they were a little “manufactured” and so, to some degree, fall under the heading of hype.


Peace
August 17, 2006 2:18:52 AM

Quote:
I think that's an interesting premise. It applies accurately to enthusiasts and people who are aware of developments in processor technology and platform.

I am not altogether sure that the enthusiast market alone could account for a shortage in supply, unless of course that’s just in 'retail' chips. If it is in retail chips (and we discount OEMs) then, considering that the Intel products were hugely publicised and enormously anticipated, it seems a bit of a strange decision to have less available than demand might meet, even considering people who did not opt for a performance system earlier who may indeed have created an unexpected high.


Yes, I agree there are not enough enthusiasts/savy people to deplete an ample supply, which leads to 2 options that I can see: Insufficient supply, or demand from more than just enthusiasts/savy community i.e. OEMs

Quote:
Stocks don't appear to be very short here in the UK. Of course your premise could mean there are less enthusiasts anticipating new builds here and so supply in effect meets that demand. If this is the case then the enthusiasts bought out all the Intel argument applies regionally. But does that hold water I wonder? Did enthusiasts in the US market cause a drop in supply because of their delays in system building but, inexplicably, enthusiasts in the UK (for example) behaved completely differently and did not wait at all? Or was the supply of chips in the first place insufficient to meet demand anyway?


Interesting. I have seen several posters state there is a ready supply in the UK, as well as Taiwan. Could it be, as you surmise, that my premise indicates fewer enthusiasts in the UK? Sure. The population of the US is about 3.2 times the size of the UK’s, but to see these results, that would assume an equal distribution of Core2s between those 2 markets.
Did enthusiasts in the UK behave completely differently? Could be. That would support a theory of a market proportional distribution of Core 2s.

Of those two thoughts, I think I would lean towards the latter. I wouldn’t guess that the UK has as many people overcome by consumerism as the US does, ready to run out the door and plunk down their hard earned pounds. I have no proof whatsoever for that, it’s just a thought.

Quote:
I am fairly sure that if all of us stopped one person on the street and asked them what Core2Duo or Conroe or indeed AMD2 was only a very small number of people would know (factoring in we might get locked up and never finish the survey :)  ). I imagine many of those people would actually own a PC though. They are pretty unlikely to have delayed a new purchase on the grounds of anticipated technology.


I think your being generous on that one. A few weeks ago, I attempted to engage one of my colleges (A computer geek who, while between jobs, had managed a best buy) in a discussion about Core 2. He’d never heard of it.

Quote:
Just in my view, from what I have read, but I tend to think the enthusiast demand is one aspect of the supply issue but one among others including Intel wanting to shift some of its current stock by managing the market.


Definitely. I think both of those, plus OEM demand are all resulting in what we’re seeing in the states.

Quote:
Of course the other point one can make is we are not actually seeing a 'shortage' in the context of the overall capacity of Intel to produce Conroe chips for people that want them - we are seeing that, in some countries, these chips are hard to obtain for enthusiasts but available from system builders..as system builders probably shift more chips perhaps there really were just not enough to meet enthusiast demand in the first place, whether people had delayed building or not. Is the priority for Intel the market that posts on these forums or Joe Bloggs ordering a PC who really doesn't know much about what's inside it? If there was a target number of chips and manufacture fell behind (not saying it did) who would get priority..I suspect OEM manufacturers would.


Concur, but I also think Intel definitely wants Core 2 in the hands of enthusiasts as well as OEMs. Many enthusiasts are computer “source references” for family, friends, co-workers, and, people who search blogs/forums for advice. For Intel, every enthusiast with a Core 2 system is a walking, talking advertisement. Example..”You’re going to replace your old system and want some advice? Sure, you can get a Dell, but make sure you get a Core 2 processor….”

Quote:
This is not to bash Intel, nor underestimate their intelligence or indeed manufacturing capacity, simply to debate the issue. I think in some places demand for these chips is outweighing supply. But I am not sure that was unforeseeable in the enthusiast market. One thing is for sure is that if people are prepared to wait they will get the chip they want. And if they waited and didn’t go for 939 etc then waiting a little longer seems to be causing a disproportionate amount of anger for those vocal enough to post about it.


I think Intel anticipated demand in the enthusiast market, but I don’t know if they got it right, underestimated it, or artificially enlarged it. I know, for the past several months, I have told anyone who has asked me to wait for Conroe. Not specifically the chip itself, but the chip and the prices drops it would bring to both the Intel and AMD product line.

How many others here have done the same thing? Take the enthusiates,/savies, then multiply by how many people each advised. How many people could that amount to?


Peace
August 17, 2006 3:34:13 AM

Turpit, I didn't want to start a flame war with you, so sorry if I looked like a jerk. Anyway, I was just responding to your supposition.

Quote:

What does Bill retiring and donating money have to do with the topic? I think I’m missing your point here. Are you attempting to imply that Gates is a humanitarian who cares nothing for money, and as such has no interest in extracting it from consumer’s pockets?
If this is what you were trying to say (I could be wrong) and Bill doesn’t care about money, then why not simply provide everyone with free copies of the Windows OS, Office suite and the rest of the software MS produces ?
Were you implying that I stated Bill Gates is evil?


Yeah, it seems like you think that Bill Gates is evil (and maybe I'm wrong about that... sorry for the misunderstanding) because you're always saying things like "predictions and statements form ole’ Billie’s press releases" that sound like you're a Bill hater. Which, I admit, I tend to recoil from due to extremists that actively try to claim that he is the antichrist. I don't love him, I don't hate him, I'm equally interested in Windows, Linux, MacOS, etc. (heck, even AROS).

Anyway, he can't just give out free versions of his software. Stock holders would sue his pants off and he would be hosed. That's probably not even within his control in the first place.

Quote:

Why do you think this is? Is it to save your “poor helpless consumers” much needed storage space? Is it the selfness nature of commercial enterprise to improve the human condition by providing the “poor helpless consumers” with inexpensive electronics?

Ask yourself this: Do you honestly believe, that every tech-oriented corporation out there including MS Intel AMD IBM MM/GE etc are all striving to provide the “poor helpless consumers” as you called them with a $5 dollar super navi-musi-video-cell-RCA DVI pocket computer? Be honest now, do you really believe this? How long do you think these companies will stay in business once everyone has one of these? Do you believe this would put the companies out of business?

Oh, by the way, explain to me how the "$5 dollar super navi-musi-video-cell-RCA DVI pocket computer" relates to the household computer market other than plug in or wireless intefaces for downloading and compatability sales pitches? (if you actually read the links I posted, you may see)

E) Bill Gates Visions
<<<these are just a couple, as THG drives don’t have enough space to store all of the predictions and statements form ole’ Billie’s press releases, and it would take a team of people a lifetime to sort through everything the man has said.>>>

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-984331.html

Note the 'fighting for sales section'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2487787.stm

This one breaks down some of his visions as laid down in print tens years ago, as compared to the reality of today
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2005/...


No, I'm not some idealistic idiot that thinks that corporations are out to "save us money". I'm just thinking about the different ways things could play out... yeah, companies could put the emphasis on selling a bunch of different computers to people for various uses. Or, they could stop worrying about the hardware so much, create some sort of "end all" devices, and start charging for subscriptions. In one of those articles, it mentioned that Microsoft lost 177 million on the home entertainment division (XBOX) (which seems to be part of your scenario), but they gained 4.36 billion from the divisions responsible for Windows and Office.

Check this out: http://news.com.com/Apple+earnings+continue+to+hum+alon...

As you can see, their "Other Music Products" are up to $216 million from $60 a year ago. With growth like that, it doesn't seem too far-fetched that they might try to capitalize on subscription-based services.

Quote:

Its late, I have to get some sleep before work, so Im only going to link to this, as it was the fastest to get to. This was just posted by Verndewd a day ago:
http://www.ati.com/companyinfo/about/AMD_ATI_Investor_P...

Look at page ten. Systems in R&D are begining to diverge, not converge.


I don't see how that would diverge anything. It seems like they are giving you more options on how you want to build your PC, but I don't see how they are saying that you need 5 PCs instead of just one. In fact, it looks like they are trying to combine CPU/Chipset/GPU with one BIOS, with custom options (e.g. do you want more CPU with less GPU, etc.). Even the title is "Combine our key building blocks with a unified development effort to create specialized solutions that our customers seek". There's then a picture of CPU, Chipset, and GPU with bars between them being combined into one box with a single BIOS/Driver/Software component. Am I missing something?
August 17, 2006 11:37:32 AM

Again very good points.

Reading a fair few UK forums, the degree of enthusiasm for Conroe appears to be roughly equal to here and certainly most of the posts on advice and things turned into 'wait for Conroe' in the run up to the release.

It would be interesting to see stats on the % of enthusiasts vs population in the respective areas as it would more accurately support or disprove the position that supply was legitimately outstripped by unusual enthusiast demand. Anecdotally I don't think the US enthusiast community appears proportionally larger (as a % of overall population) than the UK one, but these things are very difficult to judge. I think we are certainly getting up there with random consumerism though heh.

Very true on the point about walking advertisements, I am certain that Intel wants as many chips in peoples hands as possible. I do think though that the OEM market appears better supplied than the enthusiast one as far as one can see and to some extent this is a logical position.

It would indeed amount to a lot of people buying new chips, I am still interested in the regional factor that appears to have emerged.
!