Milo, Re: "I don't mind having both companies succeed. I would like the price war to end, as this cutthroat attitude is hurting both companies pretty hard."
Now that's something I definitely agree with, but what are the chances of that happening while Sanders is still in charge?
Plenty of us on this thread have considered how AMD can prosper quite well with 15-20% market share, and a greater focus on markets that Intel isn't pursuing as hard. But we all know that Jerry is set on one thing, and that is revenge. He won't stop until Intel or AMD is destroyed.
Somehow, I think the latter is more probable than the former, so as an AMD investor, I look forward to Jerry's retirement.
Re: "The great fun is watching both innovate. You have to admit without AMD, INTC wouldn't be innovating as hard."
Intel operates on what will maximize profits, and that includes a balance between spending for future technologies, as well as cost reducing their current processes. If they don't innovate enough, then their customers will have no need to upgrade, and that will limit their total available markets.
Besides, if AMD weren't around, there would be someone else willing to compete. This is too lucrative of a market to let Intel rule alone, and unlike Microsoft, Intel makes it easy to license off their architecture and make an x86 compatible microprocessor (MS certainly doesn't license out Win32 for Windows compatible operating systems).
wbmw |
