AMD's David to Intel's Goliath

Diox writes "A very insightful article was posted on ye old Tom's Hardware Guide about AMD's and Intel's strategies over this past year. " Good stuff as usual from Tom's.

Comments

interesting

[josepha48]

This was actually kind of interesting. It has been a while since I read an article that interested me like this. What I found to be most interesting though was that it suggests that even though there is a dominate company in the market now, 'natural' selection can make a better design come out on top. This is assuming that AMD delivers what it is developing with 1.2Ghz CPU's.

I guess that when another OS comes out that can do what M$ does and ALSO allows people to run there legacy M$ programs it will take the dominate place in the market if it is better.

Please don't tell me about wine and linux and vmware, cause they do not completely fit the bill. Wine suffers from the fact that it cannot run all of M$ products and results usually vary from user to user to much at this time. Maybe when corel's changes get in there it may make a difference, but not enought to make people switch.

Yes I also know that there are substitutions for Word and Office, but flat out some people just have to run word, or just want to run word cause there is some feature in M$ product that they like .

As far as vmware goes, when I tried it my cdrom started going to crap. They write there own driver for the system (under Linux atleast). I had other problems with upgrades to vmware not working and not letting me install new programs in a vmware sessions. It also does not handle all the hardware that it should. They need to write a proper program (IMHO) that does not make the kernel modules that it makes. There is already a cdrom driver why reinvent the wheel, so they can do what they want with the cdrom?

I'll look forward to seeing if Netscape can make a comeback with Netscape 5.0......

send flames > /dev/null

Re:Huge companies and monopolies.

[Rabbins]

It really does go a long way to prove the efficient marketplace theory doesn't it?

And Intel certainly did have a monopoly... I believe they actually lightened up on AMD a lot... just to keep them straggling around so the justice department would get off their back.

What I think is the key here, is that a long-running technology monopoly is near impossible.

The barriers to entry are simply too low, and things change at such a torrid rate.

The monopolies that were able to last had control of static commodities (oil and I would really include phone service (namely, the lines) at that time as a commodity). Where a start-up company would need enormous amounts of capital to even enter the market... let alone fend off a larger company.