Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft as a Company => Topic started by: Zombie9920 on 18 April 2002, 00:54
-
http://theregus.com/content/3/24651.html (http://theregus.com/content/3/24651.html)
-
Small potatoes.
AMD is tiny compared to some of the giants against microsoft. They got 30 on their side, with over 150 companies against them.
AMD is probably just afraid they will lose their rescent windfall success id M$ loses money or some of it's market dominance.
Pathetic, especialy when many of their costomers are in UNIX, servers, Linux, and IT.
-
quote:
For Sanders is a busy man. So busy that he could not find the time to read the nine states' case against Microsoft before taking the stand as a witness in the longrunning antitrust trial.
During the February 8 phone call, Gates had told him they were "crazy" and would fragment the Windows operating system, Sanders said. "You've never checked to this day whether what Mr. Gates told you... was true in the remedies," Gutman said, Reuters reports.
Hm, looks like AMD rushed into this baby half-cocked. Here's their angle. (http://www.theregus.com/content/3/24669.html) Naturally, it's led by billg himself.
-
quote:
Jerry Sanfers said:
If there were multiple versions of Windows, as the states desire, ''consumers would suffer, losing either functionality or choice, and almost certainly paying higher prices,'' said Sanders, the first defense witness in the penalty hearing.
what the hell was he smokin when he said that?
How could we lose choice, if anything we would gain a hell of a lot of choice by being able to choose what applications we want ot add to windows, and what spyware (the ones that arent already built in) we dont want.
-
something tells me that Bill accidentally left a pile of money on sanders' desk.
-
To make a long story short, AMD is gaining MS favortism. Microsoft has always been in favor of Intel CPUs' and Intel CPUs' got Intel optimizations before AMD CPUs did. Now AMD is becoming buddy buddy with MS, Bill will start adding more and more AMD optimizations to his products and he will even start using AMDs' products(The next X-Box will probably have an AMD CPU now). It is business...AMD is doing whats best for them.
(EDIT) The irony of this deal is *YOU*(The Microsoft haters) invest money in AMD products..meaning that you are helping AMD pay for the costs required to get involved in the case(s). Meaning, you are paying for Microsofts' defense.(EDIT)
[ April 17, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]
-
Big deal... paying taxes bolsters M$'s case. I seriously doubt one lousy company speaking in M$'s deffense is going to turn the tide of the lawsuit.
AMD dosn't make windoze, that's good enugh for me. Hell, even Apple supports some M$ products. (though they are totaly and rightfully against them in the trial :D )
-
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
To make a long story short, AMD is gaining MS favortism. Microsoft has always been in favor of Intel CPUs' and Intel CPUs' got Intel optimizations before AMD CPUs did. Now AMD is becoming buddy buddy with MS, Bill will start adding more and more AMD optimizations to his products and he will even start using AMDs' products(The next X-Box will probably have an AMD CPU now). It is business...AMD is doing whats best for them.
(EDIT) The irony of this deal is *YOU*(The Microsoft haters) invest money in AMD products..meaning that you are helping AMD pay for the costs required to get involved in the case(s). Meaning, you are paying for Microsofts' defense.(EDIT)
[ April 17, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]
i dont really care if AMD supports MS. AMD makes good products, they dont use unethical marketing schemes and thats good enough for me.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Master of Reality:
i dont really care if AMD supports MS. AMD makes good products, they dont use unethical marketing schemes and thats good enough for me.
Actually rating systems are an unethical marketing scheme. It makes the average dumb consumer think the CPU has more mhz than it really does. In my honest opinion...I think pulling the wool over the consumers eyes is unethical.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
Actually rating systems are an unethical marketing scheme. It makes the average dumb consumer think the CPU has more mhz than it really does. In my honest opinion...I think pulling the wool over the consumers eyes is unethical.
I agree with this entirely. I think Intel was the first to really start doing this crap and it has become standard practice in the industry.
It really is a pain to cut thrugh all the hype and really get down to the specs. In any case tho, most unbiased tests put the AMD's well above most other processors for certain tasks. And for a PC, it seems to be the best all around CPU.
[ April 17, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]
-
Zombie, what is your goal in life??
Not liking mac is one thing, but supporting Microsoft is another... I know people who dont like mac's because of things, but they also HATE MICROSOFT. Then you get retarded people. That support microsoft... I dont support nor microsoft or mac, but i only HATE Microsoft. See you just support the evil corp, and you have NO LIFE you should get one before you get to old and then its too late.
So to say, i dont care, AMD's are good Intels are good. I dont care about CPU's. But yes now i dislike AMD and there scrouge, personally i like Intel. And always have.
GET A LIFE YOU DUMBASS ZOMBIE.
(I might go into Quake I and blow your zombie ass up) (http://smile.gif)
-
i like to think that zombie235462345623785466723 is just shit stirring.
to me it looks as if AMD is trying to squeeze as much from M$ as possible without really giving anything back.
On the other hand if AMD continue this apparent M$ support, they may find themselves in bad favour on both sides of the OS argument.
as far as zombie4845354's comments go, firstly that bullshit about AMD being synonymous with linux and intel being synonymous with Microsoft is BULLSHIT!
secondly that bullshit about misleading consumers about Mhz is BULLSHIT! as i understand it you think AMD are misleading consumers. do you really think the exact clock speed is a measure of a chip's efficiency? half of the efficiency is totally dependent on the software for a start, and the very fact that motorola's chips in Apple Macintosh machines have such a low clock speed and can still compete with much 'faster' intel chips should be enough to prove you wrong for good, not that i have to since you do it so well yourself.
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
Actually rating systems are an unethical marketing scheme. It makes the average dumb consumer think the CPU has more mhz than it really does. In my honest opinion...I think pulling the wool over the consumers eyes is unethical.
That must be the dumbest statement I have read in a while on these forums, did you fell off the stupid tree zombie?
Tell me how then it is that my AMD 1400Mhz beats any intel processor running at the same (or even higher, 1800Mhz is the break even point roughly) clock speed silly?
Intel is the company who makes dumb customers believe that Mhz means anything. We don't measure car engine performance by RPM now do we?
Anyhow, too get back on topic, AMD is just trying to secure their bussiness which is understandable, they way they're doing it gets less sympathy from me though.....
-
quote:
Originally posted by X11:
Zombie, what is your goal in life??
Not liking mac is one thing, but supporting Microsoft is another... I know people who dont like mac's because of things, but they also HATE MICROSOFT. Then you get retarded people. That support microsoft... I dont support nor microsoft or mac, but i only HATE Microsoft. See you just support the evil corp, and you have NO LIFE you should get one before you get to old and then its too late.
So to say, i dont care, AMD's are good Intels are good. I dont care about CPU's. But yes now i dislike AMD and there scrouge, personally i like Intel. And always have.
GET A LIFE YOU DUMBASS ZOMBIE.
(I might go into Quake I and blow your zombie ass up) (http://smile.gif)
Well man, I *DO* have a life. Unlike you, my woman is not my hand. ;P Your age really shows man. Can't you commute without name calling?
quote:
Originally posted by Calum:
i like to think that zombie235462345623785466723 is just shit stirring.
to me it looks as if AMD is trying to squeeze as much from M$ as possible without really giving anything back.
On the other hand if AMD continue this apparent M$ support, they may find themselves in bad favour on both sides of the OS argument.
as far as zombie4845354's comments go, firstly that bullshit about AMD being synonymous with linux and intel being synonymous with Microsoft is BULLSHIT!
secondly that bullshit about misleading consumers about Mhz is BULLSHIT! as i understand it you think AMD are misleading consumers. do you really think the exact clock speed is a measure of a chip's efficiency? half of the efficiency is totally dependent on the software for a start, and the very fact that motorola's chips in Apple Macintosh machines have such a low clock speed and can still compete with much 'faster' intel chips should be enough to prove you wrong for good, not that i have to since you do it so well yourself.
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]
I never said that AMD was synonymous with Linux and Intel is synonymous with Microsoft. IT is the truth that both chipmakers want to be Microsofts' favorite because %95 of the consumer world uses Microsoft Windows and other Microsoft products. You can't tell me that MS hasn't favored Intel since the days of Windows 95 because if you do say that then I say bullshit.
For the rating thing. Yes it is misleading. I know a lady who just bought one of those "As Seen on TV PC Athlon XP X-traviganza" computers. She really thought the thing was 1800mhz and she was shocked when I told her how fast it really was. Yes the AMD processors do more per clock cycle than the Pentium 4, but AMD should just mark thier chips as thier actual speed. As I said, the rating system is used to fool consumers. The T-Bird was marked by it's actual speed and AMD sold them like hotcakes.
I think the problem is AMD really can't keep up. They are gonna start using the rating system on Durons now. :rolleyes:
Info on this here. http://www.ebns.com/story/OEG20020415S0059 (http://www.ebns.com/story/OEG20020415S0059)
quote:
Originally posted by BadKarma:
That must be the dumbest statement I have read in a while on these forums, did you fell off the stupid tree zombie?
Tell me how then it is that my AMD 1400Mhz beats any intel processor running at the same (or even higher, 1800Mhz is the break even point roughly) clock speed silly?
Intel is the company who makes dumb customers believe that Mhz means anything. We don't measure car engine performance by RPM now do we?
Anyhow, too get back on topic, AMD is just trying to secure their bussiness which is understandable, they way they're doing it gets less sympathy from me though.....
Did I fell off of the stupid tree? That kind of grammar makes me believe that you climbed up the stupid tree and never came down. ;) I bet your 1.4ghz CPU doesn't beat a Pentium 4 1.6a(The 1.6ghz Northwood).
I don't know how you can make a statement like " we don't measure a cars' performance by RPM's do we" because any car can be redlined(in the 5,000+ RPM area). I think you are trying to say we don't measure car performance by the size of the motor(like 3.8, 350, 383, etc.).
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
Well man, I *DO* have a life. Unlike you, my woman is not my hand. ;P Your age really shows man. Can't you commute without name calling?
No, he can't commute without name calling, he gets on the tram every morning and people are literally jumping out the windows due to his name calling, by the time he gets where he is going the whole back half of the tram is empty!
quote:
I never said that AMD was synonymous with Linux and Intel is synonymous with Microsoft.
well you assumed that anti Microsoft people use AMD chips! that's virtually the same thing coming from a windoid! quote:
IT is the truth that both chipmakers want to be Microsofts' favorite because %95 of the consumer world uses Microsoft Windows and other Microsoft products. You can't tell me that MS hasn't favored Intel since the days of Windows 95 because if you do say that then I say bullshit.
eh... no, i do agree with that, isn't that the whole point of this topic?
quote:
For the rating thing. Yes it is misleading. I know a lady who just bought one of those "As Seen on TV PC Athlon XP X-traviganza" computers. She really thought the thing was 1800mhz and she was shocked when I told her how fast it really was. Yes the AMD processors do more per clock cycle than the Pentium 4, but AMD should just mark thier chips as thier actual speed. As I said, the rating system is used to fool consumers. The T-Bird was marked by it's actual speed and AMD sold them like hotcakes.
What bullshit! if somebody can't READ THE FUCKING BOX then they shouldn't be trusted to wipe their own arse and blow their own nose let alone buy their own computer parts! I bet that same woman thinks that Apple Macs must be 3 times worse than intels because the clock speed is 3 times slower! quote:
I think the problem is AMD really can't keep up. They are gonna start using the rating system on Durons now.
oh poo! that's just reactionary sour grapes!
quote:
Did I fell off of the stupid tree? That kind of grammar makes me believe that you climbed up the stupid tree and never came down.
:D LOL :D i liked that retort! but don't you think somebody from holland is allowed to say "fall off of the stupid tree" instead of "fall out of the stupidity tree?" I am not dissing people from holland, i can't speak dutch, but i'm just saying, english probably isn't his first language and i think you are nitpicking in the extreme when you criticise a post in consideration of a few letters in the text of someone writing in their second or possibly even third language! quote:
I bet your 1.4ghz CPU doesn't beat a Pentium 4 1.6a(The 1.6ghz Northwood).
and how will you perform the benchmarking to prove that? pentium 4s have been coming in second even to pentium 3s you know, only due to the fact that software is largely still written with the pentium 3 in mind. It's like all those benchmarks that showed that OSX software didn't run any better with 256Mhz of RAM than 128, in a years' time, that result will seem laughable, because all the software will be coded to take perfect advantage of the hardware capabilities.
nice try zombie432564325, 3 1/2 out of ten :D keep it up...
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by psyjax:
I agree with this entirely. I think Intel was the first to really start doing this crap and it has become standard practice in the industry.
It really is a pain to cut thrugh all the hype and really get down to the specs. In any case tho, most unbiased tests put the AMD's well above most other processors for certain tasks. And for a PC, it seems to be the best all around CPU.
For the record, I was refering to the whole Mhz Myth fiasco and in no way was endorsing Zombie67876541894564 lamer comment's, but rather assumed that his statement on misleading benchmarks rfered to Mhz.
Which BTW is a very real problem. I don't think it's fair for companies like Intel, AMD, or even Apple to try and woo costomers by posting high Mhz and not indicating the actuall mesure of their products performance.
Calum,
Your last post says 256Mhz not megabytes which I think is what you meant.
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]
-
thanks! yes i did mean that, i knew what you meant btw, and that you were cleverly turning zombie3467463274's words around andd using them as SENSE. ;)
thanks for letting me know about that little slipup, i have changed it now, whew! that was a close one! you've got to be careful around here! one little slip like that and you're asking for tons of posts from people saying "what a load of horseplops this guy speaks! he doesn't even know the difference betwee Mhz and Mb!" (not mentioning any zombie42356542136, eh i mean names).
-
Maybe I'll just start replying to zombie's posts in german.....
(which, for the record, also isn't my first language)
:rolleyes:
-
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
Did I fell off of the stupid tree? That kind of grammar makes me believe that you climbed up the stupid tree and never came down. ;) I bet your 1.4ghz CPU doesn't beat a Pentium 4 1.6a(The 1.6ghz Northwood).
I don't know how you can make a statement like " we don't measure a cars' performance by RPM's do we" because any car can be redlined(in the 5,000+ RPM area). I think you are trying to say we don't measure car performance by the size of the motor(like 3.8, 350, 383, etc.).
[ April 18, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]
Zombie, none of us care!
-
quote:
Originally posted by X11:
Zombie, none of us care!
Obviously you must care because if you didn't care you wouldn't take your time to reply to it. ;P
-
Really how interesting
-
AMD didnt use model numbers to mislead customers... they did it to help customers understand performance, so that they would NOT get mislead by Intel.
AMD keeps marketing to marketing. Intel actually take their marketing all the way to their chip designs. they actually design things just for how good they will sell, instead of how good they will perform. Intel purposefully decreased the performance of their core on the P4 processor, just so they could get it to a higher frequency. higher frequency means that it has bigger numbers, and bigger numbers sell!
Intel is just more clever how they pull the wool over your eyes.
I for one will side with a company who designs a chip to perform good, over one that designs one that will sell good.
also... my Athlon XP running at 1575MHz noticibly outperforms my P4 1800 ... its not even close...
and yes a 1.4 ghz AXP (1600+) will outperform a P4 1600 northwood in most things. seen it with my own eyes
[ April 28, 2002: Message edited by: kinky ]
-
I can see both sides of the argument here...
A few months ago, I bought an Athlon XP 1400, and did believe that meant it was a 1.4GHz processor - many of my purchases are done on impulse when I haven't really checked out the specs properly!
I was a little surprised when it turned out not to be running at 1.4GHz, but have absolutely not been disappointed with its performance. Sadly I don't have a 1.4GHz Intel to compare it with, but at the end of the day I got a very fast processor at very good value, and that's why I usually buy AMD.
As I said, it can be a little misleading but I don't think the majority of people will have any reason to complain about the performance of their AMD chip - unless they get a dodgy heat sink with it - apparently they really fry when overheated!
[ April 29, 2002: Message edited by: IanC ]
-
It's called business, there is no good logic to it, only to gain money and customers. All business succomb to it.
-
I don't know... there is a certain logic to business practises (particularly with a certain software monop^H^H^H^H^Hcompany...) :-
Whether it's ethical/legal is immaterial, if it will make you more money that you will lose defending/settling in legal cases, then it is worth doing.
Sadly, companies who make an effort not to engage in illegal/unethical practises will almost invariably lose out to the who will. This is why open source is the only real way forward (as I see it) for the future of the software market in particular. You can't be put out of business or undercut by an unethical competitor if you're neither running a business nor charging for your product.
-
quote:
Originally posted by IanC:
A few months ago, I bought an Athlon XP 1400,
do you mean you bought a 1600+.. that really runs at 1400? or did you buy one that said 1400 on it? AMD never sold a Athlon XP 1400+ model number chip.. the only one i know of they ever sold that was called 1400, was the Tbird 1400, which really runs at 1400
-
man you guys are pissed!
for a minute i thought i had accidentally popped into http://www.fuckintel.com/ (http://www.fuckintel.com/)
there is no fuckamd or anyhting like it, but in searching for such a site, i stumbled across the possible explanation:
http://www4.tomshardware.com/column/02q2/020401/index.html (http://www4.tomshardware.com/column/02q2/020401/index.html) --this link seems worthy of it's own thread if it holds water!!! i will even use punctuation and CaPiTaL LeTtErS!!!
---it says that nividia bought amd
in other news
======
check this out
intel was the leader in the field. they shared everything they designed with motorola, amd, cyrix, and ibm.
essentially, open source.
in 1985, with the advent of the 80386, intel decided that it was through playing nice... it stopped sharing.
essentially, closed source.
now 1985... 1985... 1985... why does that sound familiar? OOOHHH now i know... 1985 was the first release of windows.
edit: now... what is going on here?
now, all amd could do was cooperate with cyrix to make the amd 386sx, running at 32 bits internally but only with a 16 bit external data path that could not compete with the monster 32 external that intel had puilled off.
now, in an even greater tribute in parallel to microsoft, intel re-released their 32 bit chip, making the intel 386-dx the 32x32 but also manufactuiring a 32x16 intel 386-sx to drive out amd.
from there we got clock doubling and the rest is history
amd has basically just been on a survival trip since, but though they are a step behind i have found them to be a lot more stable.
q: hey, what do you call a failed intel chip, passed off as what it's mass-manufactured second-rate circuitry can handle?
a: celeron
=====
now in my opinion, amd jumped on just to keep from being trampled underfoot, but i fear they have made a big mistake. being once again excluded from intel's privvy would kill them. need that xp support.
well, those bastards.
=====
btw, my amd 800 has been overclocked to better than 1200 stable http://www.overclockers.com/ (http://www.overclockers.com/) but then again there is such a slight difference, who can tell?
lots of edits
[ May 07, 2002: Message edited by: sporkme ]
[ May 07, 2002: Message edited by: sporkme ]
[ May 07, 2002: Message edited by: sporkme ]