<You really see no merit to the line of thinking that the quality of the product matters? >
Clearly that is not what I was saying. So, I see that you are:
- either having a comprehension problem, in which case you can go back and read what I wrote, OR,
- trying twist what I said, in which case there is no point trying to debate
<That you shouldn't use a second source for something if the two sourses have widely different quality? >
I am saying that your "widely different quality" theory is total bunk given quite a few Tier-1 OEMs have shipped many millions of chips based on the K6 family. The only real problem that K6 ever had was MHz, due to a short pipeline. The FPU was somewhat weak but I don't think that really mattered in the consumer space where most of the people just buy MHz.
<They had severe yield problems and were unable to even supply gateway? >
There was one quarter, Q1 1999, when AMD has yield problems - or more precisely bin-split problems. In all other quarters, AMD was able to supply to its OEMs quite well. Just for comparison sake, Intel did not provide adequate number of chips to almost all the OEMs from late Q3 1999 through early Q3-2000. And, even now Intel cannot provide the parts at the right MHz that the customers want. So, does Intel's supply problems form the basis for saying:
"However, Intel wouldn't have been able to supply them anyway, ..."
<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.>
Yup, you nailed it. Compaq, HP, NEC, Gateway and all the other OEMs who used K6s do not care if their customers have problems when upgrading. Only Dell does.
<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, >
There you go again putting words in my mouth that I never said.
<i jumped to the conclusion that you also didn't know the sum of the parts, but apparantly you think otherwise.>
Your arguments so far indicates that you keep jumping to conclusions. So, I am not surprised. |
