<< I am a believer in dual sourcing based on a lot of experience and I see no merit to this line of thinking. >>
You really see no merit to the line of thinking that the quality of the product matters? That you shouldn't use a second source for something if the two sourses have widely different quality? Then so be it.
<< Why would AMD not be able to supply to Dell? >>
They had severe yield problems and were unable to even supply gateway?
<< No, I am not. Are you? >>
Yes, I've built at least one machine on every major consumer desktop architecture in the past 3 years from both AMD and Intel. (k6-2, k6-3, p2, p3 (katmai and coppermine), celeron (pre/post cache fiasco), duron, athlon, and thunderbird.
<< Like I said before, what you seem to be talking about is such a small part of the business, it does not matter. It may matter to you but it didn't matter to the OEMs who successfully sold many millions of K6s. >>
It might matter to a company who wants their users to be able to upgrade without problems, aka, Dell, who used that same reasoning as part of the reason they wouldn't adopt an athlon line.
<< Completely unbounded statement. You might want to click back and see what I said. Alternately, feel free to search under my profile to see what I have posted on this topic. >>
Since the performance is made up of at least 3 parts i mentioned, (ipc, clock speed, and optimization effect) and you admit you don't know 2 of the 3, i jumped to the conclusion that you also didn't know the sum of the parts, but apparantly you think otherwise. |
