4 ms·

Your post is strange in how heavily it reflects your values instead of what's best for AMD or consumers. There's nothing so great about the current status quo t

Your post is strange in how heavily it reflects your values instead of what's best for AMD or consumers. There's nothing so great about the current status quo that we should actively discourage change or real competition. In the unlikely event AMD were ever to supplant Intel (in market share) it would just force Intel into AMD's position now. OH NO! Your business isn't so valuable that it's incentive for AMD to active try and stay in second place. We want competition, competition pushes progress. Maintaining the status quo, not so much. And if your biggest argument against AMD upsetting the status quo is you'll have to put a little more effort into shopping, well that's not really a problem for most of us...

kbenson 8y ago
> Your post is strange in how heavily it reflects your values instead of what's best for AMD or consumers. > OH NO! Your business isn't so valuable that it's incentive for AMD to active try and stay in second place. Not every post is about what's strategically best for a company. They very clearly stated it's what they personally wanted, and why. What's the point of ripping into someone because they've actually expressed desire for a specific scenario? If you think they won't actually get what they want from the scenario or action they've described, just point out how you don't think it will end up that way.
sandworm101 8y ago
Econ 101: Competition is good. Econ 102: Unhealthy competition is bad. Econ 201: The wrong kind of healthy competition is also bad. Where only two competitors sell too similar a product, two dogs chasing the same rabbit, market forces will only amplify this lack of diversity. I want a range of core/clock options at a variety of price points. If AMD and Intel become too similar on close speeds I fear the inevitable race will reduce my options to a binary of two very similar product lines. This is s recognized realworld phenomena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotelling%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotelling%27s_law

kbenson 8y ago

> Your post is strange in how heavily it reflects your values instead of what's best for AMD or consumers. > OH NO! Your business isn't so valuable that it's incentive for AMD to active try and stay in second place. Not every post is about what's strategically best for a company. They very clearly stated it's what they personally wanted, and why. What's the point of ripping into someone because they've actually expressed desire for a specific scenario? If you think they won't actually get what they want from the scenario or action they've described, just point out how you don't think it will end up that way.

sandworm101 8y ago

Econ 101: Competition is good. Econ 102: Unhealthy competition is bad. Econ 201: The wrong kind of healthy competition is also bad. Where only two competitors sell too similar a product, two dogs chasing the same rabbit, market forces will only amplify this lack of diversity. I want a range of core/clock options at a variety of price points. If AMD and Intel become too similar on close speeds I fear the inevitable race will reduce my options to a binary of two very similar product lines. This is s recognized realworld phenomena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotelling%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotelling%27s_law