On Sep 30, 4:10=A0pm, chrisv <chr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Robert Myers wrote:
> > If you don't get the way in which I am bright, and I am,
>
> You're just too smart for us, man. =A0
>
> After all, no one else figured-out that we'd all be better-off if it
> not for AMD, since they drained Intel of resources that otherwise
> would have allowed them to do IA64 right. =A0
>
> No one else figured-out that the world really hasn't realized massive
> cost and performance gains, directly attributable to the Intel/AMD
> competition and the success of AMD64.
You're stuck in a mental rut. Who cares if PC's go 50% faster? The
problems are elsewhere. So, no, your insight doesn't impress me.
Even were Itanium and NetBurst the worse architectures, we'd be making
more fundamental progress by continuing to struggle with the problems
they create. The approach that has won out is about "installed base,"
more than anything else. We'll continue to get badly-written code, so-
so compilers, and general cluelessness about the nitty-gritty of
computing.
If the goal is to design a chip for existing awful code, x86 with a
short pipeline and the lowest possible hardware latency wins. That's
the way of the world, which is different from being smart.
In any case, I''m *really* tired of hearing about it. You're like a
broken record.
Robert.
|
