Intel: A Core New Low

[9-inch]

On a technical basis, then, I have nothing to gripe about with the new Intel chip. Yet I am still unhappy with the company for two reasons:

One: Intel is still responding to AMD. This is not the dynamic company that launched new designs, features and ideas year after year a mere decade ago. Microsoft constantly re-invents and challenges itself to respond to all sorts of threats, it has gone on the offensive against Sony, IBM, and Google – three of the most dynamic major companies around and each competing in a different field. Intel is apparently content to let AMD come up with an idea, and then implement their slightly different (64-bit), maybe better (SSE), maybe worse (dual-core) version. Does that seem like a winning strategy to you, always coming from behind to try and tie, always playing defense?

Two: What’s the brand name of the new Intel chip, since Pentium is being dropped? “Core”. That’s right, Intel has made “Core” into a trademarked brand. One of the most common words used to describe a processor, and Intel hijacks it in a lame attempt at marketing exposure. That’s right, every time you ask for a “dual core” Athlon, Intel hopes that the resident idiot across the counter at the computer store will assume you mean “Intel Core Duo”. Perhaps they’re hoping to confuse search engines, or establish grounds for a lawsuit to keep AMD from advertising the Athlon X2 as “dual core”. I don’t know – quite honestly, the idiocy baffles me.

Anyone can make their own conlusions. 8)

 

[slvr_phoenix]

It's almost as bad as, oh, say, trademarking the term Windows? :lol:

Seriously, pretty silly things to complain about IMHO. But whatever get's people off. :roll:

 

[hergieburbur]

Yeah, it you are going to complain, complain about their sleezy marketing and monopolistic practices. I.E. Skype support, etc.

 

[old_times]

Does that seem like a winning strategy to you, always coming from behind to try and tie, always playing defense?

I guess :idea: Intel has launched its 65nm processors and AMD still struggling. That doesn't look like coming from behind to me.


,,

 

[hergieburbur]

I guess Idea Intel has launched its 65nm processors and AMD still struggling. That doesn't look like coming from behind to me.

Actually, you are a little off there, since Intel's 65nm chips are at about the same level as AMD's, ever though they are one process ahead.

Different designs and process benefit from different things. Intels current design needs to have a smaller feature size to keep up with AMD in heat and power efficiency. AMD on the other hand is having trouble getting SOI down to 65nm. But a lower number isn't always better.

Besdies, any industry analyst will tell you that Intel is currently playing cathup in the desktop market, which is why they are releasing so much info and the AMD camp is so quiet. However, they will also tell you that currently it looks like the situation may well be reversed by the end of this year.

 

[old_times]

which is why they are releasing so much info and the AMD camp is so quiet.

ummm... Now who is coming from behind?!!



P.S: I am not an Intel fanboy but I sounded like one!

,,

 

[9-inch]

...And let's not forget that Intel needs desperately smaller processes becasue they need larger caches to "correct" in some way the bandwidth deficiency, product of their outdated FSB.

 

[hergieburbur]

which is why they are releasing so much info and the AMD camp is so quiet.

ummm... Now who is coming from behind?!!



P.S: I am not an Intel fanboy but I sounded like one!

,,

I understand that. I am not a fanboy either, I am saying that Intel is launching a media blitz to try to make up some slack, while AMD is content to develop in secrecy for a while trying to sit on their lead.

I didnt say it made sense, but thats what is happening.