Kash,
<You are a complete ignorant fool:>
I thought Harry presented valid points and good analogies. I enjoyed reading hmaly's and Chuck's posts related to AMD's execution. I for one believe AMD has been executing well (may be not perfect) given its position in the early 1999. The company has made great progress in the last four quarters.
<AMD failed to manufacture adequate quantities of this chipset relying on VIA.>
Where did you get this? I suppose it's based on what you read here (mostly speculations by others to prove their points), and/or based on reports by hardware sites. I remember specifically, that AMD mentioned(Q3'99?) excess inventory of Irongate chipsets due to good yields.
<AMD failed to extend the 750 to support PC 133 instead relying on AMD (Via?).
AMD could have done this, only if they had set the project in motion in 99. At that time, they were not in a position to allocate any of their sparse resources to this. They even had to cut down on Capital expenditure in Q3'99 to preserve their meager cash reserves.
If AMD had allocated resources to extend the 750 chipset, we wouldn't be seeing now any Durons, KT133 chipset, Athlon chipset design efforts from Ali, SIS, or even the motherboard support. Do you think Via, Ali, SIS, etc., would be dumb enough to allocate their resources if AMD also had plans of keeping a good portion of chipset business to itself?
<You keep posting a bunch of BS. Cut it out man.>
BS? I disagree.
Regards,
Goutama |
