[apologies, slightly OT] Scott, regarding my post on how late IA-64 is (according to some sources, that is)....
A fellow at icarus@niia.net emailed me in response to that post saying that I'm "just an Intel suck-ass....", and backed up his assertion by saying the following:
"My evidence is that you constantly apply a negative spin to any AMD related news.
An example would be a benchmark showing a strong score by an AMD product, followed by your comment which doubts the accuracy of the test due to one reason or another.
While, on the other hand, you always seem to praise an Intel related news item, even though the specs/benchmarks indicate otherwise.
You die hard Intel supporters are in a state of denial. It's too difficult for any of you to accept the fact that Intel has serious competition now, and that AMDs product line just continues to get stronger, while Intel seems to be floundering.
Rick Drotleff"
I was wondering if anybody else out there thought the same of me. I do not want to seem too biased in either direction and I take criticism as such as a signal that I may need to readjust my perspective.
If it is not the case that I am overly Intel-biased, then I am at a loss to respond to this email. Can anybody help me in constructing a response to this fellow, or if it's possible could one of you fellows kindly explain to this person that I am, in fact, not ... er ... an "Intelabee", as you folks call it?
-JC
PS: Scott, I personally would have emboldened the part of higher performance for unoptimized applications. |
