From Hoovers: Microsoft investor and CNBC: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) is advancing on archrival Intel. The company ranks #2 in the microprocessor market (after Intel) with about 10% of sales. However, it has grabbed about 60% of the market for sub-$1,000 PCs.
It's not proof but it's close enough for me for now. I know I have heard they have about a 7% market share in the domestic US, and about a 15% market share outside the US, but I can't find a link just now. Spitfire will likely change that for Q3, and I think that the 30% target is doable once Dresden starts pumping 'em out.
-rt-
Re:No this is not necassarily a good thing
on
Athlons Sold Out
·
· Score: 1
Of course... that would be true if Intel could keep up with supply, but they can't either! it's quite likely that Intels part shortage caused AMD's... so analysts should be okay. I'm holding onto my stock! =)
Since Intel reported that they couldn't supply all the market due to production contrainsts, I'm sure AMD's orders increased significantly in the past two weeks.
Can you really blame AMD for not predicting that Intel would miss the ball by such a large amount?? After all, they are still less than 10% of the overall market.
1) $260 price is distorted by not including CPU or hard drive. Is this a good trend? OOH.. I can sell you a computer for $60 -- but it doesn't include a CD, CPU, mobo, video adaptor, hard disk, or anything else. Oh, wait.. those are called "cases" not computers!
2) Socket 370 support only? ACK -- probably related to point #3.
3) 100W Power supply? Can anybody give me insight about how much power the required components. My guess is not much power left over to be made available to other peripherals. Good thing they support USB otherwise this would be a serious problem.
4) I didn't see much info on the video adaptor... except that it supports DVD playback (which is nice). But I wonder what it is!
Anyhow, it has good potential for a replacement for a DVD player, and as one of the first "home theatre" computers. I'm looking forward to version 2! =)
I suppose maybe/. is analogous to having a bunch of people scrawl graffiti on a huge wall owned by Andover.net. Andover.net doesn't own the scrawl, the writer's don't own the scrawl, it's just "out there" in the public domain. Anybody who want's to look can look, anybody can refuse to look if they don't want to.
This situation could probably be alleviated by changing the disclaimer from "Comments are owned by the Poster" to "Comments are in the public domain and not the responsibility of Andover.net" or something like that. Of course that subtly changes the nature of the whole thing, now doesn't it? But really thats the result of what CmdrTaco, JonKatz, and Hemos (in the posts yesterday) are arguing for.
Yeah, of course. My point was that the only thing the Japanese gov could do would be to control the accessability to.JP -- no matter where it's located geographically. Because everything else is potentially beyond their control -- servers moved offshore, and the address controlled by ICANN.
Hmm.... they can't stop a US company (or other non-Japanese companies) from linking to illegal material -- so what are they trying to accomplish? Seems pretty useless because it's so simple to get a account offshore and host elsewhere.
I suppose the only effect that will have is they won't be able to register.JP sites that link to illegal material, and will be forced to use.COM/.NET/.ORG like the rest of us. And of course more business for US hosting firms.
OOOH... they could still keep their normal sites, link to an offshore site that contains links to illegal material. =) It's a battle the governement can't win!
Like most people, I hate the one-button mice. Obviously Apple ships them like that for a reason: newbies get confused. It makes sense for Apple to do this, given their user-friendly orientation. But after you come to use the system for more than a few minutes any user will start to want more than one button.
So why doesn't Apple ship a two-button mouse with their computers, and have each button default to the "left click" option. More advanced users can change the presets and be happy, and newbies can be content to click whatever button they want and be happy.
Of course, there is a greater problem at work here... many MacOS programs don't support two mouse buttons -- but nothing that switching to LinuxPPC can't fix.
The question them becomes, does extending the strength and length of a patent beyond some arbitrary parameters actualy provide more encouragement? Will you spend more time or effort inovating and progressing if you know that you'll control your invention for 75 years rather than, say, 20? The answer to your questions is yes. The incentive comes in the amount of monopoly profits that you can get from your patent. More time under patent = higher economic profit (in theory). If the profitibily of patent R&D increases, so will the amount of time spent on patentable items. So, if you increase the time you will get more effort spent innovating and researching, and if you decrease you will get less. Of course this only applies to large corporations, who do cost/benefit analysis -- the little guys and the universities will keep trying no matter what the patent length is.
I vaguely recall Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple II, and it was nothing like Wolfenstein 3d. Castle Wolfenstein was, to my recollection, entirely text based, though with the same theme -- SS officers and stuff. Other than that it was as different as night and day.
I never really put the two together until your post (even though I played both of them in their day), but I suppose it does make sense that they were of the same idea. But the game implemenation was totally different.
I'm just curious... to those that saw this article when it was first posted: Did the orginal article contain the redundancy of this post??
Because either the/. editor changed the postand they added the last bit on, or else the moderators that posted it up to 3 should be taken out and shot. Or something!
Well... since PocketPC is an OS not a device it's hard to have a battery life! =) You won't find mention of any battery life until any actual products are shipped.
He may have just put it up on his page (which is read by a comparativly small group of people). Since there is no submission credit, I assume that Slashdot editors just happened to pick it up from Bruce's site.
Excuse me, but did you read the post? We've got the full story over on Technocrat.net seems to imply that it was not a copy of something on his site, considering he's advertising it with his famous sig. Further, the post does give Bruce writing credit. Unless this is one of those cases where/. editors revise the post... you must be confused.
I don't see why Bruce had to draw attention to what he already believes is a simple, honest mistake. It would have been more professional to deal with it privately and only make it a community issue if Be ignored him or refused to fix the problem.
I think he answered this in his post by saying: "it's a good example of why people need to keep track of where the software they are using came from, and what license is applied to it."
I think that he is right to warn developers to watch for violiations of their GPL code by pointing out a good example.
Of course... Black Monday was only 1/2 the story -- it was just one really bad day in the midst of a market tumble. If you want to know more about it, there is a great article at Valuation Street with links at the end to all sorts of other information about the crash of 1929.
Bottom line: we aren't doing half as bad as the collapse then -- yet.
That there was more to the story than that. Or, he thought you were someone else who was harassing him for some time. It might have been the way you phrased the post... but I suppose that we'll never know for sure.
Naw... my slashbox JenniCam has been down since last night already.
I've actually noticed that the/. effect has been declining in recent months... I think that/. readers as a percentage of the web audience may be declining.
When emmitt posts something that is just flamebait, somebody will take him up on it, so it might as well be me! =) Anybody who is wondering what $cientology is really about check out this site which is a decent look at how those people screw people over. It's disgusting really... and now they are making L. Ron's movies??? What's the world coming to?
Hey, that gives me a great idea! If I started working as a pimp for underage crack whores, I would make a lot more money and could finally have enough disposable cash to donate to the Home for Little Wanderers!
You're missing the point completely! Obviously nobody is suggesting that corporations should do illegal or immoral acts for profit and donate those profits to charity!!!
Instead, the author was making a different point: that corporations shouldn't necessarily donate to charities, because it would be more efficient for them to make money (it's what they are supposed to do) and pass those savings along to the customers, who can in turn donate.
Every corporation and it's officers should obviously act "decently", as you put it. But the poster you replied to made a decent point about who in the chain would be most effective at contributing to charitable acts.
In 10 years will we all be extolling the virtues of some other OS and blasting Red Hat as the evil empire??
That won't happen because of the nature of open source. Besides, RH's dominance is quickly fading -- they lost a huge chunk of market share to Corel and other distros these last few months. And have you tried other distro's? I've got both Corel 1.0 and RH 6.2, and for the novice user Corel wins HANDS DOWN. Further, there will always be distros like Mandrake that are based on RH but are different/better in some way. And if RH becomes evil suddendly we can still use their code!
Its simply business, and Microsoft did it better then anyone else
Well, I disagree with you on that one. People who bought MS stock should have known full well there were risks of this happening today -- it's been in the works for two years now. Investors had a lot of opportunity to get out at good prices throughout those good years. But MSFT investors ran the risk of this ruling... just like Phillip Morris investors run risks investing in MO.
There's a good reason why Apple won't want to port QT to Linux -- Linux the biggest threat to them, and other small market share OSes. Linux is arguably a bigger threat to MacOS than to Windows, because Windows has the advantage of widespread compatibility.
If a Windows developer is thinking about porting to a new platform, Apple desperately wants them to port it to MacOS, but lately a lot of ports have been made to Linux instead, and Apple must be steaming mad. The FreeBSD-ish MacOS X may help that I suppose, but it's still a major problem for Apple. I don't really think that there is much more room in the world for two platforms -- it's too much work for developers. And I think Apple sees Linux as a serious threat to their #2 spot.
Slashdot Mirror
Less than 10%? I CHALLENGE you to back this
From Hoovers: Microsoft investor and CNBC: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) is advancing on archrival Intel. The company ranks #2 in the microprocessor market (after Intel) with about 10% of sales. However, it has grabbed about 60% of the market for sub-$1,000 PCs.
It's not proof but it's close enough for me for now. I know I have heard they have about a 7% market share in the domestic US, and about a 15% market share outside the US, but I can't find a link just now. Spitfire will likely change that for Q3, and I think that the 30% target is doable once Dresden starts pumping 'em out.
-rt-
Of course... that would be true if Intel could keep up with supply, but they can't either! it's quite likely that Intels part shortage caused AMD's... so analysts should be okay. I'm holding onto my stock! =)
-rt-
Since Intel reported that they couldn't supply all the market due to production contrainsts, I'm sure AMD's orders increased significantly in the past two weeks.
Can you really blame AMD for not predicting that Intel would miss the ball by such a large amount?? After all, they are still less than 10% of the overall market.
-rt-
I have some minor problems with this computer.
1) $260 price is distorted by not including CPU or hard drive. Is this a good trend? OOH.. I can sell you a computer for $60 -- but it doesn't include a CD, CPU, mobo, video adaptor, hard disk, or anything else. Oh, wait.. those are called "cases" not computers!
2) Socket 370 support only? ACK -- probably related to point #3.
3) 100W Power supply? Can anybody give me insight about how much power the required components. My guess is not much power left over to be made available to other peripherals. Good thing they support USB otherwise this would be a serious problem.
4) I didn't see much info on the video adaptor... except that it supports DVD playback (which is nice). But I wonder what it is!
Anyhow, it has good potential for a replacement for a DVD player, and as one of the first "home theatre" computers. I'm looking forward to version 2! =)
-rt-
you might be missing the drugs they were on when they wrote that! =)
-rt-
I suppose maybe /. is analogous to having a bunch of people scrawl graffiti on a huge wall owned by Andover.net. Andover.net doesn't own the scrawl, the writer's don't own the scrawl, it's just "out there" in the public domain. Anybody who want's to look can look, anybody can refuse to look if they don't want to.
This situation could probably be alleviated by changing the disclaimer from "Comments are owned by the Poster" to "Comments are in the public domain and not the responsibility of Andover.net" or something like that. Of course that subtly changes the nature of the whole thing, now doesn't it? But really thats the result of what CmdrTaco, JonKatz, and Hemos (in the posts yesterday) are arguing for.
-rt-
com/.net/.org TLD's are non-geographic
.JP -- no matter where it's located geographically. Because everything else is potentially beyond their control -- servers moved offshore, and the address controlled by ICANN.
Yeah, of course. My point was that the only thing the Japanese gov could do would be to control the accessability to
-rt-
Hmm.... they can't stop a US company (or other non-Japanese companies) from linking to illegal material -- so what are they trying to accomplish? Seems pretty useless because it's so simple to get a account offshore and host elsewhere.
.JP sites that link to illegal material, and will be forced to use .COM/.NET/.ORG like the rest of us. And of course more business for US hosting firms.
I suppose the only effect that will have is they won't be able to register
OOOH... they could still keep their normal sites, link to an offshore site that contains links to illegal material. =) It's a battle the governement can't win!
-rt-
I'm no big fan of Katz either... but it doesn't kill me to see an article posted about him on /.
Next time just forget about it and move on... you'll kill yourself with stress if you allow that to get to you!
-rt-
Like most people, I hate the one-button mice. Obviously Apple ships them like that for a reason: newbies get confused. It makes sense for Apple to do this, given their user-friendly orientation. But after you come to use the system for more than a few minutes any user will start to want more than one button.
So why doesn't Apple ship a two-button mouse with their computers, and have each button default to the "left click" option. More advanced users can change the presets and be happy, and newbies can be content to click whatever button they want and be happy.
Of course, there is a greater problem at work here... many MacOS programs don't support two mouse buttons -- but nothing that switching to LinuxPPC can't fix.
-rt-
Oh beautiful -- thanks a ton for the links! It's all coming back to me now. Sorry for my ignorance there, it's been a while! =)
-rt-
The question them becomes, does extending the strength and length of a patent beyond some arbitrary parameters actualy provide more encouragement? Will you spend more time or effort inovating and progressing if you know that you'll control your invention for 75 years rather than, say, 20? The answer to your questions is yes. The incentive comes in the amount of monopoly profits that you can get from your patent. More time under patent = higher economic profit (in theory). If the profitibily of patent R&D increases, so will the amount of time spent on patentable items. So, if you increase the time you will get more effort spent innovating and researching, and if you decrease you will get less. Of course this only applies to large corporations, who do cost/benefit analysis -- the little guys and the universities will keep trying no matter what the patent length is.
-rt-
I vaguely recall Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple II, and it was nothing like Wolfenstein 3d. Castle Wolfenstein was, to my recollection, entirely text based, though with the same theme -- SS officers and stuff. Other than that it was as different as night and day.
I never really put the two together until your post (even though I played both of them in their day), but I suppose it does make sense that they were of the same idea. But the game implemenation was totally different.
-rt-
I'm just curious... to those that saw this article when it was first posted: Did the orginal article contain the redundancy of this post??
/. editor changed the postand they added the last bit on, or else the moderators that posted it up to 3 should be taken out and shot. Or something!
Because either the
-rt-
Well... since PocketPC is an OS not a device it's hard to have a battery life! =) You won't find mention of any battery life until any actual products are shipped.
-rt-
He may have just put it up on his page (which is read by a comparativly small group of people). Since there is no submission credit, I assume that Slashdot editors just happened to pick it up from Bruce's site.
/. editors revise the post... you must be confused.
Excuse me, but did you read the post? We've got the full story over on Technocrat.net seems to imply that it was not a copy of something on his site, considering he's advertising it with his famous sig. Further, the post does give Bruce writing credit. Unless this is one of those cases where
-rt-
I don't see why Bruce had to draw attention to what he already believes is a simple, honest mistake. It would have been more professional to deal with it privately and only make it a community issue if Be ignored him or refused to fix the problem.
I think he answered this in his post by saying: "it's a good example of why people need to keep track of where the software they are using came from, and what license is applied to it."
I think that he is right to warn developers to watch for violiations of their GPL code by pointing out a good example.
-rt-
Of course... Black Monday was only 1/2 the story -- it was just one really bad day in the midst of a market tumble. If you want to know more about it, there is a great article at Valuation Street with links at the end to all sorts of other information about the crash of 1929.
Bottom line: we aren't doing half as bad as the collapse then -- yet.
-rt-
That there was more to the story than that. Or, he thought you were someone else who was harassing him for some time. It might have been the way you phrased the post... but I suppose that we'll never know for sure.
-rt-
Naw... my slashbox JenniCam has been down since last night already.
/. effect has been declining in recent months... I think that /. readers as a percentage of the web audience may be declining.
I've actually noticed that the
-rt-
When emmitt posts something that is just flamebait, somebody will take him up on it, so it might as well be me! =) Anybody who is wondering what $cientology is really about check out this site which is a decent look at how those people screw people over. It's disgusting really... and now they are making L. Ron's movies??? What's the world coming to?
-rt-
Hey, that gives me a great idea! If I started working as a pimp for underage crack whores, I would make a lot more money and could finally have enough disposable cash to donate to the Home for Little Wanderers!
You're missing the point completely! Obviously nobody is suggesting that corporations should do illegal or immoral acts for profit and donate those profits to charity!!!
Instead, the author was making a different point: that corporations shouldn't necessarily donate to charities, because it would be more efficient for them to make money (it's what they are supposed to do) and pass those savings along to the customers, who can in turn donate.
Every corporation and it's officers should obviously act "decently", as you put it. But the poster you replied to made a decent point about who in the chain would be most effective at contributing to charitable acts.
-rt-
In 10 years will we all be extolling the virtues of some other OS and blasting Red Hat as the evil empire??
That won't happen because of the nature of open source. Besides, RH's dominance is quickly fading -- they lost a huge chunk of market share to Corel and other distros these last few months. And have you tried other distro's? I've got both Corel 1.0 and RH 6.2, and for the novice user Corel wins HANDS DOWN. Further, there will always be distros like Mandrake that are based on RH but are different/better in some way. And if RH becomes evil suddendly we can still use their code!
Its simply business, and Microsoft did it better then anyone else
Well, I disagree with you on that one. People who bought MS stock should have known full well there were risks of this happening today -- it's been in the works for two years now. Investors had a lot of opportunity to get out at good prices throughout those good years. But MSFT investors ran the risk of this ruling... just like Phillip Morris investors run risks investing in MO.
There's a good reason why Apple won't want to port QT to Linux -- Linux the biggest threat to them, and other small market share OSes. Linux is arguably a bigger threat to MacOS than to Windows, because Windows has the advantage of widespread compatibility.
If a Windows developer is thinking about porting to a new platform, Apple desperately wants them to port it to MacOS, but lately a lot of ports have been made to Linux instead, and Apple must be steaming mad. The FreeBSD-ish MacOS X may help that I suppose, but it's still a major problem for Apple. I don't really think that there is much more room in the world for two platforms -- it's too much work for developers. And I think Apple sees Linux as a serious threat to their #2 spot.