On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:22:54 -0800 (PST), Robert Myers
<rbmyersusa@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>You know that I'm not an admirer of AMD, so you won't be surprised
>that I think AMD may be mortally wounded. Between the ATI fiasco and
>this, AMD is a company with products that no one is going to want to
>buy and seems unlikely to survive until it will have products that
>someone does want to buy.
Although it's a really bad piece of news for AMD, I'd have to disagree
about it being a mortal wound. After all, I distinctively remember AMD
prices once was at US$3+ back in the early days of the K7 which
ironically was a comparatively better product than Intel's P3 then,
and it's now still $7+. If AMD survived on a single key product back
then and nobody bought over them at $3+, I don't see why they can't
survive now with an overall stronger product ****tfolio and a share
price double those times.
Despite what you *claim* about nobody wanting to buy AMD products, I
see regular messages about AMD/ATI 3850/3870 selling out locally.
That's at least one wing that's still flying reasonably even if not
outperforming the competition. The X2 processors are still selling due
to their relatively cheap prices for the performance.
>That AMD is publicly whining about the
>pounding its stock price has taken should tell you something. Vendors
>who *finally* took a chance on AMD after years of hanging back have
>been fried. First there was the lame roadmap. Now this.
>
>What's the difference between this and Intel's botched FDIV bug?
>Very, very simple. At the time of the FDIV bug, x86 was for
>"peecees," and no one cared if Intel made mistakes that IBM (or DEC or
>Sun) never would. Now they do.
Actually, I think the real difference between the two is that nobody
saw it was a mistake Intel couldn't recover from. However for AMD,
this would look like a killing blow on top of the underwhelming
performance against competition for a new product generation. While I
vaguely remember outcry against Intel for that bug, I don't remember
anybody saying that it's going to sink Intel. There just wasn't
sufficient competition capacity to takeover a company with over 90% of
the market share. Thus the difference in perceived impact.
--
A Lost Angel, fallen from heaven
Lost in dreams, Lost in aspirations,
Lost to the world, Lost to myself
|
