<You think I made up "the whole industry hates Intel". Where have you been? Too young to read history and to analyze facts for yourself?>
You're starting to sound like Ali. If I'm too young and naive, then maybe you're just too old and stubborn.
<Have you talked to OEMs, MB makers, graphic card makers, PC makers, ISV ? If not then I suggest you do research for yourself.>
Now you're just being argumentative, Maxwell. It's not my job to talk to OEMs, MB makers, graphic card makers, PC makers, ISV. It doesn't help your point to suggest that I go do the research for myself when you know very well that it's unlikely I'll even bother.
Besides, this is Silicon Investor, and I paid for this subscription so that I'll be able to share in this sort of research. If I wanted to spend hours doing this sort of research on my own, I wouldn't even bother to be here.
<Without CPQ, AMD can still sell K7 systems for IBM ,HP, Acer, Gateway, etc.>
IBM may be another AMD ally, but I don't believe HP, Acer, Gateway, etc., are actively chasing AMD. My own impression is that AMD had to persuade other makers to go with their platform. It's not a trivial thing to move people towards a new Super 7 platform. Intel had its own problems trying to move customers to Slot 1, and they're supposed to be the "800 lb. gorilla." Imagine the difficulties AMD will face trying to move customers over to K7 and Slot A.
This along with a whole list of other questions is why it's not a free lunch for AMD, even if Intel shafted its customers (which you have yet to prove with more than just an isolated incident or two).
Tenchusatsu
P.S. - At least Cirruslvr responded to my argument with examples of good AMD design wins from Compaq and IBM. Positive examples (or negative ones regarding Intel) are welcome. More AMD rhetoric isn't. |
