Let us define "honesty" in terms provided by the SEC, the DOC of the State of California, the '33 and the '34 Act, and the various Blue Sky laws of the states, and maybe 250 countries in the world.
Intel complies to the letter with what those agencies call, "full disclosure".
That does NOT preclude a company from making a mistake in its opinion. An opinion of a future event, is not something that an investor can legally rely on.
As to market share, in the event to which you are referring, Intel deferred to outside sources, and expressed no opinion. Not only does the company not have a duty to guess at market share for you, but they do not have a duty to express an opinion on the sales of other companies.
Your opinion of AMD64 is biased to the point of being snotty. And God knows we all appreciate your help in guiding the company with "Itanic".
Did it ever occur to you why Intel was able to ramp dual core in three months, after AMD had been announcing that it would be ready "any day now" for two years?
Sanders, truth be known, was a study in inadequate information, but I, for one, do not blame him. If he said what he really knew, AMD would have been out of business by now. |
