New
#80
I agree with your comment in its entirety.
I should probably have elaborated a bit on my previous post, so I'll do that here.
My issues with Intel go back quite some time, before AMD was really even a player. But I was most influenced by a professor, who would take the time to explain many of the things that had happened. Years later I did a lot of research, and I mean, a LOT, concerning Intel's antitrust.
I guess because of the way it was presented to me, and how I was influenced specifically, at time in my life when I was anti-establishment... this affects me in a way perhaps it doesn't others.
But this doesn't digress from the facts, which are that, Intel does produce a better x86 chip, period. There is no denying that. However we know it isnt this simple. An overly simple example would be, would you recommend a 2500K to someone running Chrome OS, who intends to actually use the machine that way, well of course not.
Anyway, what's important; I'm not sure there's anything Intel could have done, directly, to effect Bulldozer/Bobcat, so, if this launch is a failure, it's on AMD. At least, I would think so.
The Phenom II, should have been the original Phenom, but I won't get into that here. It's a long and drawn out process and too hard to prove what Intel may or may not have done, and because they settled out of court, we may never know. It would be nothing but speculation, and while I do take interest in the subject, it's not exactly that, important to me, to defend to such an extent in this forum. Sometimes I wish people could think a little more clear, and not make certain comments or assertions without the awareness necessary for it to be fully clear, understood and informed. It should be able to stand up to critisism. I hope you guys know what I mean by that, it's not to say an opinion isn't worth anything, I've done plenty of this myself in this thread. Speculating.
For what it's worth, if Bulldozer weren't any good, there's no damn way AMD would have settled, not how I see it.
Quote
