wbmw,
I don't think there was anything to hide. I think Intel announced long before the i845 with DDR memory was launched that they wanted to do a DDR chipset,
Link please.
In fact, Intel stated that they had nothing but Rambus on their roadmap, definitely not DDR on desktop. This is the phase when Intel was lying about their roadmap to get people to buy RDRAM based solution (since in some segments, Intel had no alternative), while they were secretly working on SDR and DDR alternatives. (Any similarities to IA-64 and Yamhill?)
I'll just agree that Intel is making the better decision by going with DDR.
Ok, so are you admitting that it was a mistake to try to RAM the RAMbus down the throat of the industry, withholding support for PC-133 (later reversed) and withholding support for DDR (later reversed as well).
I wonder if 2 to 3 years from now you will also agree than Intel is making the right decision by going to x86-64, abandoning than IA-64?
Will Intel be making the right decision when they decide to forgo multiplier locks? Is Intel ever making bad decisions in your mind? Or you have to defend every single decisions Intel makes.
I have been AMD shareholder on this board, and I have questioned probably half of the decisions AMD made. You seem to be content with every single decision Intel makes, until Intel makes a reversal, and then you support the new decision, keeping you 100% in sync with Intel PR operation.
If you think this is an unfair portrayal of you, maybe you can list instances of current Intel policies, actions, direction or decisions that you just absolutely hate or even things that upset you or you are annoyed by.
Joe |
