Re: They used modelhurtz numbers to deceive unsophisticated consumers
That's complete nonsense, and you know it, the actual, if irrelevant, mhz was apparent in every piece of material distributed by the company. Should they have reported the voltage for each processor as a headline item? The max operating temperature? How about amperage?
What Intel did was intentionally deceive consumers by misrepresenting the performance of their chips, and those of their competitors.
How about if AMD creates a shell "independent consortium" that claims to produce reliability analyses of systems and the they conclude, and reports, and widely disseminates analysis results demonstrating that Intel chips are 50 times as likely to corrupt data as AMD chips? Is that OK? Given the history of FDIV, 1.13ghz PIII, MTH, etc. it's certainly true, and probably an understatement.
An independent consortium has found that Intel chips are more than 50 times as likely to corrupt data as AMD chips.
Would you be OK with that?
Especially if the consortium wasn't really independent, but was hiding that fact? |
