Linked by David Adams on Fri 12th Sep 2008 16:30 UTC, submitted by irbis
Permalink for comment 330197
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-05
Intel. Plus, Intel has a great reason to make sure that AMD survives; they want to avoid antitrust legislation. Now that Apple switched to Intel from the G5, there are only two companies left in the desktop processor realm (discounting VIA's sliver of marketshare). Does anybody remember Microsoft's investment in Apple more than a decade ago? http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html
I don't honestly think that would happen, but it does make sense in a twisted kind of way. There aren't that many companies in the world with the fabrication experience and capital necessary to handle server and desktop processors. Clearly, AMD's people are having a difficult time with it, so merely spinning the fabrication department off into a new company on it's own won't work.