AMD Intel Lawsuit Article on THG

[fierydemise]

Nothing really new but a good read for anyone interested in the case

Link

 

[HDTVMan]

Originally posted by: fierydemise
Nothing really new but a good read for anyone interested in the case

Link

Wonder how THG will screw this up.

 

[Vegitto]

Originally posted by: HDTVMan

Originally posted by: fierydemise
Nothing really new but a good read for anyone interested in the case

Link

Wonder how THG will screw this up.

Meh, by saying AMD doesn't stand a chance (as they did), or by saying the complaint wasn't justified (which they did).

 

[fierydemise]

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: HDTVMan

Originally posted by: fierydemise
Nothing really new but a good read for anyone interested in the case

Link

Wonder how THG will screw this up.

Meh, by saying AMD doesn't stand a chance (as they did), or by saying the complaint wasn't justified (which they did).

I must have missed that I saw the article as surprisingly unbiased

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: fierydemise

Originally posted by: Vegitto

Originally posted by: HDTVMan

Originally posted by: fierydemise
Nothing really new but a good read for anyone interested in the case

Link

Wonder how THG will screw this up.

Meh, by saying AMD doesn't stand a chance (as they did), or by saying the complaint wasn't justified (which they did).

I must have missed that I saw the article as surprisingly unbiased

Unbiased?

There are some traditional arguments for companies to go rather with Intel than with AMD products - such as proven quality and higher reliability

 

[fierydemise]

I read that comment as them saying some companies defend their purchase of only Intel computers because of "proven quality and higher reliability"

 

[Concillian]

I think they are more stating that that is one of the arguments companies use for going with one manufacturer over another.

Besides, at one point it was true:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1499
(link is to a 2001 AT article on a then new P4, relevant section quoted below, emphasis is mine)

AMD?s solution is one that has been promising since it?s introduction. The Athlon processor not only outperforms everything Intel can offer in almost all situations, but the Athlon is also selling for extremely low prices. The flagship Athlon 1.4GHz processor can be found for under $180 while Intel?s Pentium 4 1.7GHz processor will set you back over $300. The only problem AMD has really had with acceptance of their Athlon processor is platform reliability and it appears as if NVIDIA may be the one to solve that issue very soon.

While it may no longer be true, it was at one point a valid argument, and corporations have significant inertia to change corporate viewpoints on things such as this.

I don't disagree that THG has traditionally had some bias, but I think you are reading more into that particular statement than is actually there.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Concillian
I think they are more stating that that is one of the arguments companies use for going with one manufacturer over another.

Besides, at one point it was true:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1499
(link is to a 2001 AT article on a then new P4, relevant section quoted below, emphasis is mine)

AMD?s solution is one that has been promising since it?s introduction. The Athlon processor not only outperforms everything Intel can offer in almost all situations, but the Athlon is also selling for extremely low prices. The flagship Athlon 1.4GHz processor can be found for under $180 while Intel?s Pentium 4 1.7GHz processor will set you back over $300. The only problem AMD has really had with acceptance of their Athlon processor is platform reliability and it appears as if NVIDIA may be the one to solve that issue very soon.

While it may no longer be true, it was at one point a valid argument, and corporations have significant inertia to change corporate viewpoints on things such as this.

I don't disagree that THG has traditionally had some bias, but I think you are reading more into that particular statement than is actually there.

True...but Intel has had this problem much more often that AMD has...think back and add up the times either company has been forced to actually recall a product and you will see what I mean!

 

[HDTVMan]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Concillian
I think they are more stating that that is one of the arguments companies use for going with one manufacturer over another.

Besides, at one point it was true:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1499
(link is to a 2001 AT article on a then new P4, relevant section quoted below, emphasis is mine)

AMD?s solution is one that has been promising since it?s introduction. The Athlon processor not only outperforms everything Intel can offer in almost all situations, but the Athlon is also selling for extremely low prices. The flagship Athlon 1.4GHz processor can be found for under $180 while Intel?s Pentium 4 1.7GHz processor will set you back over $300. The only problem AMD has really had with acceptance of their Athlon processor is platform reliability and it appears as if NVIDIA may be the one to solve that issue very soon.

While it may no longer be true, it was at one point a valid argument, and corporations have significant inertia to change corporate viewpoints on things such as this.

I don't disagree that THG has traditionally had some bias, but I think you are reading more into that particular statement than is actually there.

True...but Intel has had this problem much more often that AMD has...think back and add up the times either company has been forced to actually recall a product and you will see what I mean!

Your right Intel has had many more recalls and microcode updates than AMD.

I didnt think THG was biased in the article for a change. Maybe trying to duck the radar.

Maybe THG will be named in the suit after all its rumored he got paid by Intel whether it be free chips or cash is unknown.

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: Viditor
True...but Intel has had this problem much more often that AMD has...think back and add up the times either company has been forced to actually recall a product and you will see what I mean!

I think what you are missing is that reality doesn't matter to Joe IT executive. They do in fact use the argument that Intel is more reliable than AMD.

It doesn't matter whether it's true. I think many don't even care much, they just know that if they go AMD and AMD screws up they will be blamed. However, if they go Intel and Intel screws up, nobody will fault them because Intel is the 'status quo' and the most popular option.

Arguments like these are as much to justify making a CYA (CoverYorAsh) decision as for any reason based in reality.

I simply don't think THG should be faulted as biased on the particular comment pointed out by Lonyo

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: Viditor
True...but Intel has had this problem much more often that AMD has...think back and add up the times either company has been forced to actually recall a product and you will see what I mean!

I think what you are missing is that reality doesn't matter to Joe IT executive. They do in fact use the argument that Intel is more reliable than AMD.

It doesn't matter whether it's true. I think many don't even care much, they just know that if they go AMD and AMD screws up they will be blamed. However, if they go Intel and Intel screws up, nobody will fault them because Intel is the 'status quo' and the most popular option.

Arguments like these are as much to justify making a CYA (CoverYorAsh) decision as for any reason based in reality.

I simply don't think THG should be faulted as biased on the particular comment pointed out by Lonyo

The "nobody blames you for going Intel" argument doesn't really hold these days. Think about it...an IT manager's only concern is that the OEM follows through on their warranty in a quick and efficient manner and except for the very high end, it doesn't matter about anything else except power use and performance.
With very few exceptions, the only customers that AMD and Intel have are the OEMs and distributors...

 

[Hacp]

And enthusiats.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: Hacp
And enthusiats.

Definitely. When I installed HalfLife2, I was struck by the proportion of AMD to Intel in Valve's stats, enoughso that I saved the page as a .mht archive.

Right-click > Save As... and then open with Internet Explorer. Processor Vendor. In this market, it's a tight race.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: Concillian
I think many don't even care much, they just know that if they go AMD and AMD screws up they will be blamed. However, if they go Intel and Intel screws up, nobody will fault them because Intel is the 'status quo' and the most popular option.

Arguments like these are as much to justify making a CYA (CoverYorAsh) decision as for any reason based in reality.

I think this nails it for larger organizations.

When I installed HalfLife2, I was struck by the proportion of AMD to Intel in Valve's stats

I think that reflects the "enthusiast" market share. The overall market share has AMD at around, what, 16%? That should tell us how small a group "enthusiasts" are compared to the big picture.

I did find the "Video Card Description" interesting. Over 20% were Radeon 9600/9800. I wonder how much the free Half Life 2 coupon had to do with that, and how many people purchased those cards because of the coupon (either over Nvidia or weren't in the market). That pre-bundling of the game seemed a brilliant move.

After that, almost 17% total were Geforce4 MX and FX 5200 series - the budget cards. This should also tell us a few things. First, regardless of the hype over high end video cards, most people are buying budget cards probably because... that fits within their budget. This makes me think that EA is making a bad move with BF2 video card requirements. I think if they would have lower quality settings they would sell more games. Eye candy certainly is nice, but [sacrilege]games *GASP* can be played in "Atari" mode and still be enjoyable[/sacrilege]. Second, perhaps a good portion of these video card sales are for people upgrading disposable mass-market computers that come with integrated graphics and no AGP slot (typical Celeron system). People shopping for a PCI gaming card may not have much of a choice but to go with these low end cards.

Geforce4 Ti series have 6.24%. W00t! I have many happy years using these series of cards. My most recent usage was a disappointing one when the BF2 demo was released. Reaffirms notion that EA Games made a bad move. I was at Fry's Electronics with a BF2 box in my hand when they were on sale for $37.99. Walked out of there without it because it wouldn't run on my video card that plays all other games just fine.

 

[imported_Frallan]

Well there were a few hints there that THG isn't totally unbiased such as the page titles for example. But given the the lvls to which out THG Bias filters have been turned (me I have had to install a mental 2GW filter amplifyer to read what THG says in clear language) I must say that I found it refreshingly unbiased.

I mean they acctually presented both sides - which in THG language (with filter engaged) equals laying down flat on your back begging not to get hurt... Now I dont think that article was that biased so It might be ok. Or Intel have *warning - conspirational theory* told them to write some pages on it with a AMD tint so that when the answer comes out they have more credibility.