On Sep 25, 9:16=A0am, chrisv <chr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Robert Myers wrote:
> >"Dale E. Pontius" <suit...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >> I'll confess to being pro-AMD, but I will deny being an AMDroid.
=A0My
> >> position is simple: The marketplace is healthier with competition.
> >> Intel is in no danger whatsoever of going away. =A0AMD is. =A0In as
mu=
ch as
> >> AMD has had quite a good streak with the execution, on K7 and K8, I
pu=
t
> >> my $$ where my mouth is. =A0Any processor decision where the
technical
> >> merits are a tie or near tie, I'll vote with my $$ to keep
competition
> >> alive.
>
> >"Competition," where "competition" is defined as the survival of one
> >particular player, is about as free market as a Soviet-style planned
> >economy.
>
> Poor you. =A0X86 dominates, with two major producers.
>
> Would it be better to have two main architectures, both solely
> produced by your beloved Intel? =A0I'm certain that you think so...
>
There'e a logical leap here that's so long you need a personal jet
pack to make it. It doesn't seem that way to you because you are
reciting a bit of the local religion that you among others regard as
divine truth.
If your "free market" requires the survival of a specified company,
then it isn't a free market at all, or, at best, you are using the
term "free market" in a new and idiosyncratic way.
What that has to do with "two main architectures" and what those two
(apparently obvious) main architectures would be is a chasm that your
mind apparently crosses with ease but mine doesn't. I made a broad
point about the term "free market" and you narrowed it to your
perennial obsessions. You're so wrapped up in this silly game that
you can't see it for what it is. In any case, what you have to say is
a non sequitur.
> >The "competition" by AMD has served to freeze in a particular
> >architecture. =A0Maybe good or maybe bad, but which isn't obvious on
the
> >face of it. =A0AMD steered (manipulated) the market to its benefit just
> >as Intel does.
>
> >This computer has an AMD processor. =A0I don't think of it as putting
my
> >money where my mouth is. =A0I think of it as taking advantage of the
> >naivete of investors in AMD, which has to sell its processors at a
> >much lower margin than Intel.
>
> Guffaw. =A0"Naivete". =A0Yes, I'm sure you're so much smarter than they
> are..
Point taken. It's hard to be smarter than markets, just as it's
harder to beat the odds betting on s****ts, unless you've got a couple
of referees in your pocket.
Robert..
|
