Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:37:13 02/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2000 at 00:20:57, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >Yes, but now you can buy computer with Atlon inside from IBM/COMAQ/HP/... (9 of >10 top companies), so that factor is less important now. > >Eugene I don't think that matters much. Intel did a _real_ marketing job when they started the "Intel Inside" marketing strategy. It made the average non-techie computer user aware of the microprocessor. Students of mine, working at our local Comp-USA Superstore, report that "Does this have an Intel CPU?" is a _very_ common question, from folks that don't know the difference between EIDE and SCSI disks. I wouldn't say I agree with this "silicon bigotry". But Intel sure did a job to create the environment. They can't be faulted on a marketing basis. > >On February 15, 2000 at 23:22:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 15, 2000 at 20:13:13, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 2000 at 17:50:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>However, Intel chips do work. AMD chips sometimes work. They make their share >>>>of mistakes (PII-compatible when they are most definitely not, for example). >>> >>>I don't know about "sometimes working." For every Athlon bug, I'm sure I can >>>point to an equivalently serious PIII bug. How about those CuMines that Intel >>>shipped that had to be turned on multiple times before they started working? >>>That sounds like the epitome of "sometimes working" to me. Heh. >>> >>>>The profit comes from businesses and repeat customers. I notice that hardly >>>>any major corporations use AMD processors in their office machines. Which makes >>> >>>I think this tune might change. Imagine being an IT person responsible for >>>purchasing several hundred computers. You can either buy PIII/800s that will be >>>shipped an undetermined number of months from now, or Athlon/850s, that are >>>cheaper and can be shipped immediately... >> >>I'm not sure I follow that. I _have_ an 800mhz PIII from gateway. We just >>picked up the phone last week, said we want a PIII/800, 512M ram, two Intel >>server (express pro 100) cards, etc. It arrived 3 days later. These things >>are shipping. It is a gateway something-or-other model 4200, and we bought >>it for about 2200 bucks counting the dual ethernets, etc (we are going to make >>a linux firewall out of it). >> >>I can tell you what happens on this campus if you suggest buying 'oddball' >>hardware... you don't work here much longer. There is _great_ resistance to >>tried-and-unproven hardware in the UAB hospital. If you order off-brand >>hardware, then there is specific paperwork that has to be done, certifying >>that you know that support will be minimal, that it can't be used in a uab- >>critical application, etc... >> >>Most businesses have _always_ bought IBM equipment, even though you could >>get 2x the hardware for 1/2 the cost from DEC, Univac, Burrougs, Honeywell, >>Xerox, etc. It is the reputation that counts... the name... not what is >>inside... >> >> >>> >>>AMD's sales in January were as high as they were in December. Things are >>>_definitely_ picking up for them. >>> >>>Next year, consumers will have a choice between the Itanium and the >>>Sledgehammer. I sure know which one I'd choose. >>> >>>>>BTW, Bob, I don't appreciate the snide little phrases that preface your posts. >>>>>Like "Tom, please." and "Tom, read my lips carefully." Do you really need to >>>>>make condescension part of your debate strategy? Hmmmm.... >>>>Wasn't intending it to be condescending... only a way of emphasizing a point >>>>that is easy to miss. Sorry... >>> >>>Well, please don't do it any more. I can read perfectly fine. >>> >>>-Tom
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.