AMD steps out...

http://slashdot.org/articles/02/11/24/0556252.shtml?tid=142

"Forbes Magazine is reporting that AMD will no longer compete with Intelto make faster, smaller, and more efficient processors. Just as Mac users would be worse off if Windows didn\'t exist, Intel users will be much worse now that AMD will no longer compete. You see, there\'s this thing called demand, and when there are no competing products in a market, a good or service will always increase the price to the economic equilibrium, unless forced not to by the state (forget that right now, communists!!). In English: you\'re going to get less new technology, and higher prices on existing technology."On the other hand, AMD is definitely not exiting the chip business -- they\'re just trying to branch out from chips for microcomputers.

This sucks.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

hmm.. seems strange to me.. When amd are just about to release the barton and hammer processors. There\'s also no info on the amd site.. I\'d say this is all bullsh@t.  but if they are indeed gonna stop making processors.. Say hello higher prices intel processors.

Sounds fishy to me. Although it\'ll be a sad day if it happens - then ALL PC lovers are f#cked - Intel or AMD lovers alike. Even if you don\'t like AMD they\'re helping driving Intel prices down.

I hope it\'s teh fake.

cyrix - "welcome back to the closet AMD, i missed you"

Yeah, I bet you\'re real happy now mm.

Well, I do see the charm in paying $300 more for a processor because of the lack of competition... Let\'s get back to the old days of overpriced CPU\'s. LONG LIVE INTEL!

a company should not be rewarded for losing money, even if they sell you things real cheap.

this is one of the fundamentals of capitalism.


if you dont wanna pay for a new CPU, dont

we dont see m$ lowering the costs of its OS\'s cause its competition is coming on strong.  in fact, they raise thier prices [not that i would actually pay for one, :rolleyes:]

Coming on strong? LOL, from where? Sorry, but I don\'t see an alternative for a MS OS for Joe Sixpack anywhere.

Besides, Intel have been bending you over and taking you in the ass enough over the years. Now you\'ll ask for more? Pfft. Suit yourself.

bending me over?

do you think paying $20,000 for a hunk of steel, rubber, and plastic that we drive around = bending over and taking it in the ass?  or $100,000 for a stack of bricks and wood we live in?

alternative for joe sixpack - apple
in fact, apple is designed for morons

yes, i said coming on strong.  did u miss the report that has hacked out of m$\'s servers last week that stated Unix is superior to what m$ has?  remember the \'halloween documents"?  i give m$ 3-5 years and thier in deep shit

ripped from pricewatch
$145 - Pentium 4 2.0GHz Sock 478
(which is more CPU than 95% of what people need)

lets compare fastest from pricewatch:

$346 - Athlon XP 2700 333 (only 2.17 ghz actually)

$385 - Pentium 4 2.8GHz  (only 2.8 ghz actually)

:rolleyes:

...and an XP 2000+ (a comparable processor) is $74. :rolleyes:

When Linux (or whatever *nix) is as userfriendly and supports as many programs, games and hardware devices as Windows, THEN I see a broad market for non-MS OS\'es. Until that happens - no chance in hell.

Oh, and regarding your latest edit. Do you think the 2.8 GHz would be $385 if it wasn\'t for AMD?

:rolleyes:

lol, the clockspeed on that xp 2000 is only 1.6ghz  (i hope you knew this)

comparible intel chip is $109

30$ extra = peace of mind

intel has always been priced highed that thier competion.  you tell me why all thier competition dies off.

any product is expensive when it comes out.  what kind of market would we have if stuff came out cheap and then got more expensive?  ask standard oil about that

look at DVD burners.  noone is complaining when they  costed 400$+ when they came out.  hell, i remember then CD burners cost that much and blank cd\'s  were almost 2$ a piece.  now u can get a CD burner for 25$ and a DVD burner for under $200

the computer industry is driven by price

AMD backed themselves into a corner and now thier suffering for it

So now you\'re saying that the XP 2000+ isn\'t comparable to a P4 2 GHz? And yes, of course I know it\'s not 2000 MHz (actually it\'s 1.67 GHz. But you knew that right?). But come on... even you can\'t be that silly.

And for a guy as supposedly \'1337\' as yourself I\'m sure you remember the good old days where Intel didn\'t have any competition at all and were able to rape consumers in the behind. I sure as hell won\'t put hundreds of dollars worth of profit in their hands, just because they think it\'s ok to overprice their products.

leet?

i remember my computer not having a color monitor, a 5.25 floppy and no HD way back

not sure if that makes me "leet"

computers (like cars) are expensive to upgrade/purchase.  its just the way it is

do you honestly think intel is gonna suddenly raise thier prices now that AMD backed out?

I\'m not saying Intel will immidiatly increase their prices (well, yet), because that won\'t be a very smart move. AMD is not exactly dead yet - they have plenty of processors out there. And next year we\'ll see the Athlon 64. What I was saying is how Intel would have higher prices if it wasn\'t for AMD (or at least - they\'d drive the technology further, faster - if it was only Intel we\'d prolly be stuck at 1 GHz still because there wouldn\'t be any other (faster, or cheaper) products to choose from.

intel has 10ghz CPU\'s already

it\'s in thier best interest to stagger thier releases (hence thier roadmap)

lack of competition will slow the drops in prices, nothing more

Bah, don\'t tell me we would be @ 3 GHz now if Intel didn\'t have ANY competition. If they had a complete monopoly, it would only make sense to keep the current products on the market as long as possible to maximize profits. Why spend so much on R&D and push the limit every couple of months (weeks?). The answer is they wouldn\'t. They earn top bucks on the top of the line CPU\'s. Why undercut their current top of the line products? Because of competition. It\'s simple business.