[citation][nom]kinggremlin[/nom]As opposed to AMD, who only cares about you the customer, and has no interest in money. The goal of every company is money alone. That's why they exist. The only reason AMD isn't doing what you perceive Intel as doing, is because AMD is in a market position where they can do it. If Intel and AMD swapped places, AMD would be doing the exact same thing Intel is doing now. If AMD didn't exist, Intel wouldn't suddenly stop innovating, despite what the tinfoil hat club members like you want to think. It probably won't move along at the same pace, but it will still continue, because people aren't going to buy the same thing forever (or even more than once really). Microsoft has no real competition despite what the Apple fans might think, but MS still continues to regularly churn out new releases of their software. Why? Because in order to continue making money, they have to continue developing new products that the consumer will want to upgrade too.The same goes for Intel, no one is going to buy a new computer that uses the same parts as their current computer just because it is a few years old. There has to be incentive, be it greater performance, or more features, for the consumer to spend the money for a new computer.[/citation]
I would disagree with you on many points here.
1. companies don't exist to do nothing except make money. There are people who wish to do things well, and they do those things and accept competition in doing them. As long as they are able to keep up with that competition and make enough money to get by to keep doing that, they will keep going. Most companies don't generally drive out their competition. they just do what they do and try to be the best. There are other people, like those running Intel and Microsoft (despite the blame Bill Gates keeps getting, it is really Steve Balmer that has that drive to buy out the competition.) Those are the people who wish to dominate others. They wish to be on top no matter the method or cost, just to have the power. these are precisely the people we don't want to have that power.
2. as for AMD's business habits, did we see AMD trying to drive out Cyrix or other smaller competition? no. They found a very small company with an encouraging design and bought them out to give them the power to bring that design to the broad market. That's how they got the K6 and Athlon 64 designs. I have not seen them offer any kind of rebate to reduce their usage of other people's chips (as Intel did when the Athlon 64 proved to be a good competing design). I have not seen them withhold chipset supplies if a company put out a product from a competitor (as Intel did with the 440BX chipset).
3. Intel has already proven they will stop innovating if there is no competition with the P4. For years, nobody else produced a chip that could compete with the P4, and Intel didn't produce a single new design for 5 years. Oh, sure, they brought out one with a 1MB cache that scaled up to 3.8GHz, but it wasn't even as fast as the previous 3.2GHz design with 512K cache because of thermal throttling. They just racked up the prices for worse and worse designs. It wasn't until the Athlon 64 sales started ramping up and AMD took 25% of the market that Intel actually started responding, with a design they had hiding in the wings to wait until they had to come up with something new. Don't you realize that Intel spends more on marketing than on research?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram