You seriously think that an AMD K6-2 350 MHz box is less reliable, all other components being equal, than a PII-350 MHz box?
Are you serious?
The chances of a CPU failing in either situation are negligible, especially compared with software failures and failures of other hardware components.
My HOME PC is much more stable than the one at my office. Funny, my home PC is an OVERCLOCKED K6-350 I put together myself and my office computer is a Compaq PPro 200. Does that make the PPro chip less reliable? No...NOT NECESSARILY.
If a solid, respectable box make introduces a business line based on an AMD chip, customers won't think twice about buying it. They will be confident that the box maker, by putting its good name on the product, has attested to its reliability. Therefore, in the corporate market, it's not the end user that is choosing Intel products; it's the box maker. The end user hasn't had much of a chance to choose anything else, because the corporate PC market is generally high end and AMD isn't quite there yet on the MHz front. When it gets there (if it gets there), you will see Intel's corporate market share start to erode.
A year and a half ago they said "nobody will want AMD inside their computer." Now they say "no company wants AMD inside their computer." The truth is nobody and no company CARES, as long as what's inside is fast and reliable and competitively priced. Reliability is a non-issue because no matter who makes it, the CPU is probably the most reliable part in a PC. Therefore it's price and performance. When AMD offers the performance (MHz) that corporate buyers need, they will sell lots of chips to businesses. It's that simple.
Kevin
Kevin |
