http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/te...er=rss&emc=rss
Printable View
Lol ... how long till another one from another country?
I dont think it concerns intel though and although its good leveling the playing field, it really doesnt. Too many devices now use intel chips, so they've pretty much tied up the market.
What AMD should do/should have done, is get in to a market that intel hadnt already tied down and prevent them from entering it. If you cant beat them, join them.
Diversity is the game and one idiots within AMD management have no idea of, so in a way, they only have themselves to blame for their misfortune. Maybe they should hire professionals instead of retards.
One would think that would just about put them out of business alone with M$ since this has been both of their business models for the past 15 years! :mad:Quote:
It also prohibits Intel from redesigning its chips purely to harm a competitor.
How can you put all the blame on Davis, when Goliath comprises of two monster companies both in bed with one another?Quote:
Diversity is the game and one idiots within AMD management have no idea of, so in a way, they only have themselves to blame for their misfortune.
I can blame them quite easily!Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce
Your point is the exact point I was making. AMD should have "got in to bed" with a monster company in another sector.
For decades even consumers have seen Intel creating exclusive relationships in certain sectors. AMD havnt branched out from desktop/laptop processors too much.
Once they saw Intel tying down certain markets, they should have thrown money at other markets to try and diversify a bit.
Its common business sense, you expand or die ...
It's just sour grapes they didnt do the same the first and the development/business sector of AMD are bumbling retards.