1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News AMD exec "would never buy" AMD

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 15 Jan 2010.

  1. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
  2. Digi

    Digi The not-so-funny Cockney

    Joined:
    23 Nov 2009
    Posts:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    220
    Seems to me that maybe he was saying it in the sense that; ''our products are not competitive enough right now, we need to do something about it'' and not so much bashing his own company. Regardless, how can Intel use this as proof they weren't a big competitor at that point? They were pretty much the only and certainly the next biggest manufacturer of desktop CPU's and quoting mails from inside AMD is beside the point. Down with the Intel scum!
     
  3. thehippoz

    thehippoz New Member

    Joined:
    19 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    5,780
    Likes Received:
    174
    yeah he was just being honest..
     
  4. Boogle

    Boogle New Member

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2002
    Posts:
    282
    Likes Received:
    6
    Looks taken out of context to me. What he was prolly saying is that objectively, to joe public AMD isn't attractive while Intel is. Intel has a load of marketing behind it, ans is the 'de facto standard' while AMD had very little marketing, wasn't the de facto standard, which made joe public nervous. It's not that different from a CEO saying that his own web site sucks, and it needs an overhaul.

    Of course due to the halo-effect of the Athlon64 AMDs have started to appear in OEM PCs far more often. However, if they didn't so utterly trounce the Pentium4, AMD would be where they were when the Athlon64 was first around - in one or two PCs at PC World at most. Harsh, but it's the way the market goes - brand name often matters more than the product itself.
     
  5. shanky887614

    shanky887614 New Member

    Joined:
    13 May 2009
    Posts:
    203
    Likes Received:
    0
    i read this a few hours ago on tomshardware i dint realise that custompc was slow with news?
     
  6. mi1ez

    mi1ez Active Member

    Joined:
    11 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    1,443
    Likes Received:
    18
    Normally vice-versa!
     
  7. yuusou

    yuusou Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    2,082
    Likes Received:
    320
    It would be honest if it were today, but in 2004, AMD was ahead of the game.
     
  8. Kúsař

    Kúsař regular bit-tech reader

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    317
    Likes Received:
    4
    Either this or that guy didn't know anything about CPUs. Who'd choose P4 over A64?
     
  9. Pappy_Lazaru

    Pappy_Lazaru Bish bash bosh!

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    18
    Likes Received:
    0
    Taken out of context or not...woooops!
     
  10. l3v1ck

    l3v1ck Fueling the world, one oil well at a time.

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    12,945
    Likes Received:
    17
    ???
    2004 is exactly the time people should have bought AMD CPU's. The Athlon 64's were vastly superior to the Netburst based Pentium 4's.
     
  11. tejas

    tejas New Member

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2008
    Posts:
    101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Couldn't agree more with Henri Richard. Used Phenom II and it was dog poo next to my Core i7 lynnfield that replaced it. Fact of life is that Intel is the performance leader.
     
  12. l3v1ck

    l3v1ck Fueling the world, one oil well at a time.

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    12,945
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yeah, but we're talking about what he said in 2004.
     
  13. V3ctor

    V3ctor Tech addict...

    Joined:
    10 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    583
    Likes Received:
    2
    But it still applies today :D
     
  14. Greentrident

    Greentrident Active Member

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    550
    Likes Received:
    29
    It's a bit unfortunate that an employee of a company who should be attempting to look objectively at that companies position can't do so without finding it used against them 6 years later!
     
  15. Skiddywinks

    Skiddywinks Member

    Joined:
    10 Aug 2008
    Posts:
    930
    Likes Received:
    8
    It doesn't still apply today, it only applies today (and rather recently). It has literally just been said several times that back then AMD was the champ.

    Gotta agree with you Greentrident. Besides, no one actually knows what metric Richard is basing this objective assessment on. He could in fact be pointing out the fact that looking from an objective viewpoint, it would seem Intel is more popular and a better choice, which is exactly what the case is about since the only reason they were more popular was the dirty tactics Intel used, when they clearly were not the better choice. The quote makes no sense otherwise.

    Personally, I would like to see the full quote in context before I start making assumptions.
     
  16. V3ctor

    V3ctor Tech addict...

    Joined:
    10 Dec 2008
    Posts:
    583
    Likes Received:
    2
  17. tad2008

    tad2008 New Member

    Joined:
    6 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    332
    Likes Received:
    3
    What this shows is that the then Vice President clearly had his own agenda and had no real interest in the company and the products themselves. If he had, then being in such a high position within the company would have given him ample opportunity to direct and guide AMD to improve, instead he took the easy option and put down the company and products and then left. It is people like this working for companies all around the world from small businesses to international corporations that bring a company down and thwart genuine progress.

    It takes vision, hard work, determination and above all, belief in the company and product. If employees, no matter their station do not exhibit this, then they are simply dross and holding the company back.
     
  18. Xen0phobiak

    Xen0phobiak SMEGHEADS!

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2002
    Posts:
    3,847
    Likes Received:
    18
    <3 the blind AMD fanboyism in this thread.

    AMD moved ahead with the T-Bird 1400, some of the later XP cores, and the A64 but didn't push hard enough to move beyond cheap machines and a fanboy niche. Aside from that, Intel have had the better products, and my cash.
     
  19. liratheal

    liratheal Sharing is Caring

    Joined:
    20 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    796
    Someone made an oopsie!

    Regardless of whether the chips were competitive or not - The fact that one of the execs was openly admitting that they didn't think they were making competitive products is hardly going to make AMDs case any easier to argue.
     
  20. s3v3n

    s3v3n MMO Cold Turkey -fail

    Joined:
    23 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    I remember reading this and what he was talking about was platforms and brand penetration. Think Centrino. On both consumer and especially corporate side, Intel had a MUCH stronger platform than AMD. As for brand value, AMD had little to none in 2004. Even now it's little known.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page