I like the way you do reviews, Evan. You get to the point quickly and you are comparatively consistent from review to review.
At the beginning you delt with what constitutes an enthusiast's board. I never seriously thought about it myself. I guess I'm not an enthusiast. IAC, it does not appear the the Intel board is much of an enthusiast's board by whatever standard. If this is a specially directed mobo to the enthusiast, Intel must usually do some pretty pathetic mobos. (Actually I think it is a pretty normal Intel mobo.) Maybe the price to performance ratio will be a pleasant surprise when we find out what Intel sells this item for, unlike the usual (non-surplus) Intel mobos available to the general public. Without the Intel name (perhaps ECS?) this mobo might attract buyers provided it sold at small premium to a K7S5A. Maybe Intel is counting on someone doing a hacked BIOS, while Intel maintains a solid, unyielding stance against OCing dictated by it's unrivaled, unchallenged marketing department which determines the technical features of every Intel product.
Don't get me wrong, I have a high opinion of Intel's technical prowess (and I stand in awe of Intel's marketing.) I have even owned several Intel products since the 8080 era, in the extremely rare circumstances that it made any sense to do so. On the whole, Intel has aways offered extremely low value to price compared to readily available alternatives, and has depended on other factors to dominate the market.
BTW, I never owned an 8080. I owned a Z80, which had twice the clock speed (as I recall), and sold well below the price of the then current Intel product. Intel sued the maker, Zilog, alleging patentabilty of the instruction set, and lost, setting in place the opportunity for competitors to clone the x86. In todays "digital millenium act" environment, Zilog would be crushed, and had that been the case way back when, we would now no doubt be paying Intel $2000 for 100MHz processors.
Facebook
Twitter