Dan, Re: "Back when there really were second sources for X86 chips, in the days of the 286, Intel wasn't a major power in the industry. But then Intel introduced a 32 bit Pentium to compete with 16 bit 286's that were available from NEC, Harris, and AMD. Despite the fact that it was years before there was a significant base of 32 bit applications, the marketing value of the "32 bitness" of the Pentium let Intel destroy its competition and that's how Intel came to dominate the CPU market."
I think you've got that wrong, Dan. Intel was never a really big name company until they launched the "Pentium", and ran with that name brand. They convinced the public that the CPU was the center of their PC, that Megahertz meant Performance, and that the Internet would run faster on an Intel CPU. These were all marketing victories that made Intel the giant they are today. Intel never marketed the "32-bittness" of their CPUs. Microsoft marketed the "32-bittness" of Windows 95, but I don't recall Intel ever doing the same thing. Windows 3.1 of course became very popular around the time of the 32-bit 386, but I think if you asked people how many bits were in Windows or the CPU, 99% or more would have had no idea.
Intel marketed their processor based on brand name, and based on their vigorous advertising. AMD isn't going to be able to do the same, just by saying that Hammer is "64-bit". They will have to follow Intel's lead with marketing campaigns and advertising. I don't see any other way.
wbmw |
