AMD is significantly larger than ATi, and ATi is slightly larger than nVidia. How exactly will nVidia manage a hostile takeover of both when it can't even handle either one by itself? Processor companies are always much larger than video companies - as you say yourself, "relatively low volume," and you also imply small profit margins. Both are facts, but they are counter to your points. I suggest reviewing ATi's corporate profile and history; they aren't as limited in the market as people believe.
No reason for AMD to buy ATi? Take a look at Intel - they are famous (or infamous) for designing their own chipsets. Guess which company (other than nVidia, ATi's rival) makes chipsets...and are particularly good at making AMD chipsets? Enter ATi. It's clear by nVidia's earlier purchase of ULi that they expected this move. If nVidia will go after any company, it'll be towards Creative, but that's a different topic all-together. The advantage here is that AMD will be able to press its 4x4 and ATi will press its CrossFire - all in one neat package. Intel suffers license fees on other chipset makers, but that will be nonexistent for AMD with such a union - this forces nVidia down a dark path, indeed.
I do agree with you about your instigation point - I think that any merger here would be mutually planned.
The Internet, in many ways, is like the old Wild West. That is to say, the frontier of freedom and individual expression - by whatever means necessary. The problem with such freedom is that you have corruption wherever government does exist, and lawlessness where the government does not. The UN is trying to solve both of these problems in a singular motion. That does not bare justification and it tends to disrupt the integrated population. The majority of the people, however, would benefit from this...even if that's only due to their ignorance or lack of participation.
The true denizens of the Internet - like most people found here - naturally rebuke against such reformation policies. Rightly so. The haven that has been created, the virtual world in which we can express, will cease to exist in many forms. Most Americans still see Texas as badass or lawless, and compared to most states that is true. However in contrast to its original form it is little more than a novelty. This change took a long time and much conflict, but it inevitably came to pass, even in a country that existed only because of rebellion.
This will be a long and hard fight, but we of the Internet will lose. The freedom that now exists will cease to be. This is simply because it will move to the greater good - which, in otherwords, means a compromise between dominating cultures. Europe is liberal, China is communist...you see where this is going. America's freedom helped create the Internet and I believe it should remain in those hands, but we can only hold off so long. There are breaches all over the world and even our own people - mostly ignorant of the facts - will be persuaded.
The Internet will become international and corporate and things once taken for granted will slowly dissolve. Space, other planets...colonies...these will exist as the new frontier. Not in my lifetime. I'll enjoy the Internet today and over the next decade or two, and that's my peace. Revel in this while you still can, for it will be but an eyeblink in the history of civilization.
I personally prefer CRTs for gaming and multimedia applications, although a high-quality LCD is more than suitable. The problem at the moment and for the perceivable future is cost for larger LCDs, and that is without mention of costly DVI cabling. Choice is mostly about aesthetics and practicality.
Response time actually refers to the time it takes a pixel on the grid to shut off and on, known as rise and fall. The listed response time is cumulative. Therefore the proper calculation is to take the higher of the two values (rise) for determing the effect on visuals. With 16 ms LCDs, this is typically 10-12 ms depending on quality, which would relate to 100 and 83. However values specified are optimistic and not always met; this also is determined by LCD quality. But for the sake of argument, for gaming purposes 60 is the ideal to avoid motion blur, so any 16 ms makes this grade and high-quality 25 ms is borderline.
Slashdot Mirror
AMD is significantly larger than ATi, and ATi is slightly larger than nVidia. How exactly will nVidia manage a hostile takeover of both when it can't even handle either one by itself? Processor companies are always much larger than video companies - as you say yourself, "relatively low volume," and you also imply small profit margins. Both are facts, but they are counter to your points. I suggest reviewing ATi's corporate profile and history; they aren't as limited in the market as people believe.
No reason for AMD to buy ATi? Take a look at Intel - they are famous (or infamous) for designing their own chipsets. Guess which company (other than nVidia, ATi's rival) makes chipsets...and are particularly good at making AMD chipsets? Enter ATi. It's clear by nVidia's earlier purchase of ULi that they expected this move. If nVidia will go after any company, it'll be towards Creative, but that's a different topic all-together. The advantage here is that AMD will be able to press its 4x4 and ATi will press its CrossFire - all in one neat package. Intel suffers license fees on other chipset makers, but that will be nonexistent for AMD with such a union - this forces nVidia down a dark path, indeed.
I do agree with you about your instigation point - I think that any merger here would be mutually planned.
The Internet, in many ways, is like the old Wild West. That is to say, the frontier of freedom and individual expression - by whatever means necessary. The problem with such freedom is that you have corruption wherever government does exist, and lawlessness where the government does not. The UN is trying to solve both of these problems in a singular motion. That does not bare justification and it tends to disrupt the integrated population. The majority of the people, however, would benefit from this...even if that's only due to their ignorance or lack of participation.
The true denizens of the Internet - like most people found here - naturally rebuke against such reformation policies. Rightly so. The haven that has been created, the virtual world in which we can express, will cease to exist in many forms. Most Americans still see Texas as badass or lawless, and compared to most states that is true. However in contrast to its original form it is little more than a novelty. This change took a long time and much conflict, but it inevitably came to pass, even in a country that existed only because of rebellion.
This will be a long and hard fight, but we of the Internet will lose. The freedom that now exists will cease to be. This is simply because it will move to the greater good - which, in otherwords, means a compromise between dominating cultures. Europe is liberal, China is communist...you see where this is going. America's freedom helped create the Internet and I believe it should remain in those hands, but we can only hold off so long. There are breaches all over the world and even our own people - mostly ignorant of the facts - will be persuaded.
The Internet will become international and corporate and things once taken for granted will slowly dissolve. Space, other planets...colonies...these will exist as the new frontier. Not in my lifetime. I'll enjoy the Internet today and over the next decade or two, and that's my peace. Revel in this while you still can, for it will be but an eyeblink in the history of civilization.
I personally prefer CRTs for gaming and multimedia applications, although a high-quality LCD is more than suitable. The problem at the moment and for the perceivable future is cost for larger LCDs, and that is without mention of costly DVI cabling. Choice is mostly about aesthetics and practicality. Response time actually refers to the time it takes a pixel on the grid to shut off and on, known as rise and fall. The listed response time is cumulative. Therefore the proper calculation is to take the higher of the two values (rise) for determing the effect on visuals. With 16 ms LCDs, this is typically 10-12 ms depending on quality, which would relate to 100 and 83. However values specified are optimistic and not always met; this also is determined by LCD quality. But for the sake of argument, for gaming purposes 60 is the ideal to avoid motion blur, so any 16 ms makes this grade and high-quality 25 ms is borderline.