3 ms·

There's been plenty of criticism (and mostly justified as far as I can tell) of AMD's efforts. But on the flip side, I think we should also acknowledge what is

There's been plenty of criticism (and mostly justified as far as I can tell) of AMD's efforts. But on the flip side, I think we should also acknowledge what is communicated by the fact that the CEO[1] of the company is directly addressing issues like this, and making it clear that they plan to fix them. With a lot of companies the size of AMD, you'd never get that kind of communication from the CEO. It's a small thing, but it is one thing that keeps me optimistic that AMD will eventually develop the great software stack they need. [1]: Or whoever controls her Twitter account. I have no idea if she actually reads/posts herself, or pays a staffer to do that stuff. But I'm assuming she approved the content of the tweet in either case.

jncfhnb 3y ago
I’m sorry but why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing anything or conveying a clear plan to fix it? That sounds like the opposite of how I would describe this.
- digging 3y ago
  > why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing How could it be described as anything but? It isn't specific, but it is direct.
  - jncfhnb 3y ago
    I suppose it is literally a direct statement. However if I ask someone what they’re going to do about X, and they say they’re working on it, I’m going to assume they have no idea what to do about X, and are in fact not working on it.
    - digging 3y ago
      Maybe that stems from your experience but I don't think that's a fair expectation in general. Sharing detail about their approach could have all sorts of downsides. It might be they are still investigating multiple approaches and don't know which one they'll pick (this is usually what I mean when I say that). It might be the CEO doesn't want to disclose details about the work that would be better filtered through marketing. It could be they're trying to avoid leaking trade secrets.
      - jncfhnb 3y ago
        That’s fine. But it still amounts to having said nothing of value
        digging 3y ago
        That makes no sense to me. It's a confirmation that they are working on it, rather than ignoring it. It's nothing but value.
    - mindcrime 3y ago
      However if I ask someone what they’re going to do about X, and they say they’re working on it, I’m going to assume they have no idea what to do about X, and are in fact not working on it. Fair enough, but I would say that applies to an actual conversation. I don't consider a couple of back and forth Tweets to be a conversation. That's not what Twitter is for, or how it's usually used, IMO. Twitter is for short, pithy, quick little comments ... like "The team is on it". And not to beat a dead horse, but again, I assign some particular weight to this simply because this was the CEO of the company - not some low level flunky, or even a VP where they are one of 3,362 VP's they might have. Would a more detailed response be appreciated? Sure, 100%, absolutely. But to my way of thinking, this response is still significant.
      - jncfhnb 3y ago
        That’s fine. But the message is not that they’re doing something or not. It’s that no meaningful info was conveyed.
- mindcrime 3y ago
  > I’m sorry but why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing anything or conveying a clear plan to fix it? I'm not saying it conveys a plan, but rather that it conveys intent and that - coming directly from the CEO - that is significant. Again, compare to most other companies of the size of AMD... would the CEO of the company respond to tweets like that? I'd say "no" in general, and that that is part of why this carries meaningful weight. Clearly the issue is important enough to get the attention of Lisa Su, and important enough for her to respond. That tells me something. YMMV, of course.

jncfhnb 3y ago

I’m sorry but why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing anything or conveying a clear plan to fix it? That sounds like the opposite of how I would describe this.

digging 3y ago
> why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing How could it be described as anything but? It isn't specific, but it is direct.
- jncfhnb 3y ago
  I suppose it is literally a direct statement. However if I ask someone what they’re going to do about X, and they say they’re working on it, I’m going to assume they have no idea what to do about X, and are in fact not working on it.
  - digging 3y ago
    Maybe that stems from your experience but I don't think that's a fair expectation in general. Sharing detail about their approach could have all sorts of downsides. It might be they are still investigating multiple approaches and don't know which one they'll pick (this is usually what I mean when I say that). It might be the CEO doesn't want to disclose details about the work that would be better filtered through marketing. It could be they're trying to avoid leaking trade secrets.
    - jncfhnb 3y ago
      That’s fine. But it still amounts to having said nothing of value
      - digging 3y ago
        That makes no sense to me. It's a confirmation that they are working on it, rather than ignoring it. It's nothing but value.
  - mindcrime 3y ago
    However if I ask someone what they’re going to do about X, and they say they’re working on it, I’m going to assume they have no idea what to do about X, and are in fact not working on it. Fair enough, but I would say that applies to an actual conversation. I don't consider a couple of back and forth Tweets to be a conversation. That's not what Twitter is for, or how it's usually used, IMO. Twitter is for short, pithy, quick little comments ... like "The team is on it". And not to beat a dead horse, but again, I assign some particular weight to this simply because this was the CEO of the company - not some low level flunky, or even a VP where they are one of 3,362 VP's they might have. Would a more detailed response be appreciated? Sure, 100%, absolutely. But to my way of thinking, this response is still significant.
    - jncfhnb 3y ago
      That’s fine. But the message is not that they’re doing something or not. It’s that no meaningful info was conveyed.
mindcrime 3y ago
> I’m sorry but why do you feel “we’re on it” is directly addressing anything or conveying a clear plan to fix it? I'm not saying it conveys a plan, but rather that it conveys intent and that - coming directly from the CEO - that is significant. Again, compare to most other companies of the size of AMD... would the CEO of the company respond to tweets like that? I'd say "no" in general, and that that is part of why this carries meaningful weight. Clearly the issue is important enough to get the attention of Lisa Su, and important enough for her to respond. That tells me something. YMMV, of course.