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.
Thread beginning with comment 267082
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: What a crock!
by alexandru_lz on Thu 30th Aug 2007 18:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: What a crock!"
Member since:

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.

I agree, and what I meant was not necessarily that we should have all moved to SPARC. The competition itself also had the advantage of making both Intel and AMD push the x86 with some good innovations.

However, in those moments when I daydream, I keep thinking what computers would have been like if desktops hadn't been hindered by the slow progress of x86 in the late 90s.

Many thanks for your reply. I should have pointed out those things from the very beginning before criticizing the article's author for not telling the whole story about competition.

Reply Parent Score: 1