Linked by Kroc on Thu 30th Aug 2007 13:03 UTC
Editorial I hear often that when something new appears that "competition is good". The primary reasons competition is seen as good, are: it drives down prices; it gives consumers more choice; it pushes technology forward, quicker. Competition is not good because: competition is why consumers have to choose between HD-DVD and BluRay; competition is why DRM exists; and more. In this article, each of the supposed benefits of competition will be looked at in more detail.
Permalink for comment 267036
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: What a crock!
by sbergman27 on Thu 30th Aug 2007 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE: What a crock!"
Member since:

I do. The competition between Intel and AMD is one of the things that has kept the x86 architecture around several years past the point when it should have been dumped.

You are perfectly free to buy an Itanium, a Sparc, or a PPC. Anyone is.

Intel tried to push Itanium. The industry, and the public chose X86_64.

X86_64 solves the two biggest problems with x86_32 very cleanly. It removes the addressing constraints. And it eliminates the register-constrained nature that has been the bane of x86 for decades.

There are babies. And there is bath water. And it is best not to confuse the two, since people tend to have rather strong feelings as to their relative values.

Opinions differ, of course. I'd take the bath water any day. ;-)

Edited 2007-08-30 15:51

Reply Parent Score: 4