SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Tony Viola who wrote (52391)8/24/2001 5:52:11 PM
From: jjayxxxxRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
TV,

<That sure is what I was reading on this thread for a couple of weeks, that stuck in my mind as a strong theme.>

You're not ignoring the right people then. ;-)

<Not only that, it was the theme du jour for days on the TMF AMD thread as well.>

So what you're saying is that your assessment of "the popular sentiment on this thread" is influenced by your excessive viewing of a completely different site? <g>

JJ



To: Tony Viola who wrote (52391)8/24/2001 5:58:40 PM
From: fyodor_Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 275872
 
Tony: That sure is what I was reading on this thread for a couple of weeks

I didn't see the subject [of "getting Gateway to go 100% AMD"] pop up on this thread before today or yesterday, but then I don't read other threads all that much ;-). (cf. JJ's comments)

That said, a you and Tench seem to have a serious problem distinguishing betw. "popular sentiment" and a good old-fashioned game of "what it". Virtually no one on this thread believes AMD will go with a pseudo-GHz number. Sure, there are some who believe it would be a good idea, but regardless of one's belief, it makes sense to discuss it.

I don't know if going with a pseudo-GHz number is a good idea (I certainly don't think it should be called "GHz" unless it is defined as is currently the case), but that won't prevent me from discussing it.

-fyo