you dont get it. they would lose hardly any volumes. regular people would still upgrade on the basis they do now. they dont give a damn if performance is not improving as it should be. do you really think that ordinary people upgrade because of performance? no they dont. they see new os is out, or wife need a new laptop with better features, then they get new system. just how big is the percantage of enthusiastic users that upgrade for performace gains with every introduction of new cpus? very small.
ok, so you´re saying Intel would spend same/more money on R&D as they do now with amd goneSee here you are actually completely wrong. Both AMD and Intel is reducing heavily on R&D right now. AMD have reduced it with about 500million. Intel with about 500million aswell. So currently R&D is the loser of competition, in favour of a pricewar. So a big nono, development lost here!if you do you´re pretty naive...
i do, but that doesn´t change anything about vista being earlier if there was competition. just dont say they were working on security issues and DRM because that´s BS. vista is late because MS doesnt have to answer any competition.You lack basic understanding of Vista. Do some research on whats changed under the hood.
ok, you get your point. there are areas where monopoly might be better solution. but in case you didnt notice we are speaking about competition in Desktop PCs processors. in case you really believe that this market is better off with monopoly than once again...Is that why the monopolies around in europe and asia made sure people could have the infrastructure ready for broadband? Just look at the "competition" on US broadband. Even in the ultra dense NY area you got crap. Nobody really want to digg down fiber on their own if there is competition. Its very expensive and a longterm investment. And if nobody else does it its a current loss that could kill you in the name of competition.![]()
THERE WOULD BE NO POSSIBLE ROAD INTO NEW AREAS WITHOUT COMPETITION. just because we still run on x86 doesnt mean its caused by a competition. what kind of logic is that? and you said it dozen of times in this forum. intel has more developing teams and huge economic background. they surely can take ventures into new areas. amd is one who should play it safe.And since we still run around with x86 and all its flaws and drawbacks. Its a clean show on competition aint helping here, but rather keeping us somewhat stagnant. All in the name of competition, because any possible road into new areas would give you a huge loss if it fails. And burden you economicly in a way your competitors aint.




if you do you´re pretty naive...

Bookmarks