[plug] AMD sues Intel -- somewhat OT

[Dion]

Phillip Kilby wrote:

>How is the automotive industry stagnant? Do you mean technology wise
>or am I way off track.
>  
>
Right on track, I do mean technology wise.  They release barely 
differentiable products every
couple years, where most of what is 'new' is more about marketing than 
real technological
improvements.

>Some people bag AMD because of the myth that they were never as stable
>as Intel systems. Other people have criticised AMD for being a copy of
>the "real thing". Then there's the argument that AMD are lying about
>clock speeds, that CPU cycles are the "real" speed of a system.
>  
>
Thats true, in the early days AMD was perceived to be producing less 
stable products. And
that myth lingered long after it was no longer true.  AMD didn't so much 
lie about clock speeds
as invent a magic number to kind of compare against competing products 
that were heavilly
exploiting the myth that more Gigahertz was a valid indicator of 
performance.

>I believe this relates to cars very much actually Dion. When people
>think size is better, ie v8 vs 2L. Or when people see power figures
>and forget (or simply don't know) to take into account the rest of the
>information. ie the whole truth. Like does a car with 80 air bags make
>it safer? How about the driver... haha I could ramble on forever.
>  
>
Sure, we could both go on for ages. :-)  There are a lot of parallels 
between these industries,
both sell the majority of their products to consumers to lazy / busy / 
indifferent to become
knowledgable and skeptical consumers.  Thats why so many think a 5 litre 
V8 is automatically
superior to my 2.5 litre turbo skyline. Often they are mistaken :-)
Just as so many computer product buyers think that the most GigaHertz is 
all they need to know
but are never quite sure why that Gigahertz number doesn't match the 
size of their hard drive
under Windows when they get the machine home, or better still like my 
Dad, think they get twice
as much ram when they by the DDR kind.

>Same thing goes for CPU's. I believe marketing pressure can bring
>about misunderstanding of the truth. Isn't that just as evil? I doubt
>the average consumer would understand what the advantages of having an
>AMD system would mean. To tell you the truth, even as a programmer I
>have difficulty distinguishing the difference. So what chance does the
>gullible consumer have?
>  
>

Yes absolutely, and while I didn't explicitly say it, my main belief is 
we need to be educated
consumers.  Your skills as a programmer can take two machines and 
compare their performance
and draw your own conclusions.  Most people don't even bother to try out 
their favourite apps
before they buy their computer.  At least you can differentiate products 
by what suits you best.

The crux of my argument toward Simon was that, the software and 
microprocessor industries are
not as different as he claimed.  That both have differentiating features 
in their products if the
consumer chooses to look.  And mostly that making chips is a lot harder 
than making software
based on the level of installed software base that must be supported.  
The fact that AMD and intel
can make chips fully compatible such that you and I can almost never 
tell the difference is more of
a testament to the engineering that goes into those products than any 
level of dificulty involved.
The rest of my argument was that both groups should be competing on 
features / technological
progress rather than anticompetitive behaviours.

>
>Phillip.
>
>  
>
Cheers.
Dion.

-- 
"Never ascribe to malice that which may adequately be explained by incompetence." - Napoleon Bonaparte