To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
How so? they designed something that was needlessly more complex than their competition, delivered it late and it is barely competitive with the Intel offering. Explain to me how that engineering decision of making something more complex than required, was a good idea given the lateness and lack of competitiveness with Intel's offerings.
Most of the issues for AMD's current predicament are not due to microarchitectural decisions, but rather process/fab issues.
The reasons for the stumbling that the 65nm AMD process is experiencing (process shared by IBM and Hitachi) are far deeper and more complex than most people in this thread know or have a remote familiarity with.
So I find it amusing to see people with passing knowledge to make statements that are so off the mark as to be laughable. For some reason, anyone who can assemble a PeeCee nowadays thinks he/she is an "expert" in the field and can figure out what a company is doing right/wrong.
Being inside the belly of the beast it is amusing to see some of the comments. Naive doesn't even begin to capture the nature of a lot of these posts. Provides a nice comedic relief though...
Edited 2007-11-21 13:01





Member since:
2005-11-10
"Unfortunately AMD is a company run by engineers who are unwilling to acknowledge when a cool idea is not worth persuing because the benefits promised cannot offset the risks it entails taking a more complex path. "
Quotes like this makes me wish there was a Heisman-like trophy for Armchair Quarterbacks...
Edited 2007-11-20 21:43