Dan, <<<Look at what's now available to the economy in terms of computing capability and cost, and honestly compare that to what would be out there in the absence of competition from AMD.>>>
I agree with you that competition is good for the economy. Almost all OEM's would also agree and would like to see more than one supplier.
I would not mind it at all, if AMD were a worthy competitor. I wouldn't mind it at all if AMD was a good investment. I wouldn't mind it at all if I could invest in AMD and make money doing so.
But, these discussions have turned things into good guys versus bad guys. The AMD arguments on these threads are often bogus, outright lies, or extremely deceptive. They turn me off from even considering AMD as an investment. I am afraid I would be infected and have to engage in denial as minimum for membership to the AMD investment club.
Most (not all) Intel advocates on these threads are either employees, ex-employees, or professionals with an open agenda. They may not always be right, but there is little or no intentional deception.
I have stated that this is not entirely a zero sum game. Both companies can thrive. Right now, it is more about the economy than anything else.
For AMD to succeed, they have to be more than a "me too" company. They are doing 2Ghz and we are doing 2.075 Ghz is not going to cut it.
They are selling for $200 but we are selling for $149 - that's not going to cut it either.
They have products for the enterprise server market, yeah we're going to be there too. That's also not going to cut it.
Right now, AMD should be renamed M2T (M Squared T - or Me Too Technologies).
For AMD to knock out the incumbant, they would have to go into markets where Intel is not. They would have to find new markets. They have to care about shareholder interests. It's not impossible, but right now, they are not close to getting it done.
Mary |
