3 ms·

I saw a tweet somewhere (IIRC in the anandtech sidebar, unfortunately I'm not finding it right now) where the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta

by cesarb 8y ago

I saw a tweet somewhere (IIRC in the anandtech sidebar, unfortunately I'm not finding it right now) where the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta version of the microcode which leaked into the final version.

djsumdog 8y ago
That makes much more sense. If that's what happened, Intel should just come out and say it. Own your mistakes, or at least adopt this lie if it wasn't a mistake, simply because it's plausible and will help them save face from a PR perspective. (The Nobel Lie as it would be).
geezerjay 8y ago
> the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta version of the microcode I don't see how this changes anything at all.
- kikoreis 8y ago
  If it's a limited access beta version, restricting redistribution and benchmark publishing makes a lot more sense.
- SolarNet 8y ago
  If they had given it to specific companies before it was finished the benchmarks would not represent reality while it was under development, and as part of the embargo on these beta clients, they wouldn't be allowed to publish it. Obviously not good if it makes it into the public release.
- Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
  Because people are irrational and clickbait runs rampant. If they contract testing of the beta to a 3rd party, they don't want them running benchmarks because if they get released, news organizations will jump on it, broadcasting the performance hit. This matters because when later beta versions improve performance, the news about the improved performance doesn't spread nearly as much. Even if it does, the first impression sticks, and there's nothing Intel will be able to do about it.
  - SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
    Amazing how many people are still doing mental gymnastics to give Intel the benefit of the doubt. This should have stopped being the default position a while ago.
Aloha 8y ago
This is also what I suspect
walterbell 8y ago
Helpful side-effect of this leak: benchmark public reaction.
ksec 8y ago
that was Ryan smith. chief editor of anandtech. https://twitter.com/RyanSmithAT/status/1032546813176307712 https://twitter.com/RyanSmithAT/status/1032546813176307712 and if it was true they would have said so in their reply.

by cesarb 8y ago

djsumdog 8y ago

That makes much more sense. If that's what happened, Intel should just come out and say it. Own your mistakes, or at least adopt this lie if it wasn't a mistake, simply because it's plausible and will help them save face from a PR perspective. (The Nobel Lie as it would be).

geezerjay 8y ago

> the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta version of the microcode I don't see how this changes anything at all.

kikoreis 8y ago
If it's a limited access beta version, restricting redistribution and benchmark publishing makes a lot more sense.
SolarNet 8y ago
If they had given it to specific companies before it was finished the benchmarks would not represent reality while it was under development, and as part of the embargo on these beta clients, they wouldn't be allowed to publish it. Obviously not good if it makes it into the public release.
Sohcahtoa82 8y ago
Because people are irrational and clickbait runs rampant. If they contract testing of the beta to a 3rd party, they don't want them running benchmarks because if they get released, news organizations will jump on it, broadcasting the performance hit. This matters because when later beta versions improve performance, the news about the improved performance doesn't spread nearly as much. Even if it does, the first impression sticks, and there's nothing Intel will be able to do about it.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
  Amazing how many people are still doing mental gymnastics to give Intel the benefit of the doubt. This should have stopped being the default position a while ago.

Aloha 8y ago

This is also what I suspect

walterbell 8y ago

Helpful side-effect of this leak: benchmark public reaction.

ksec 8y ago

that was Ryan smith. chief editor of anandtech. https://twitter.com/RyanSmithAT/status/1032546813176307712 https://twitter.com/RyanSmithAT/status/1032546813176307712 and if it was true they would have said so in their reply.