Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
mas
Should fly off the shelf
Possibly. However certainly not before it has been shipped to the shelf.
and prove all those who think ATI will not make a profit seriously wrong.
It will. Just not anytime soon, imo.
Apart from this, from what I have heard about R600 the best is to come. DX-10. "It rocks". DX-10 should become the battlefield of grafics-benchmarks anyway within the course of the year.
K.
MiMiC
Welcome. I edited sth in my previous post. K.
MimiC
http://www.edn.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6406234
K.
p.s: Appreciate yr quotes. Not sure about the truth part, though.
"Who cannot lie does not know what truth is". (Adorno)
Sounds a bit rough around the edgdes in english language. Aphorisms are very hard to translate.
Dear Pete,
The fact I did not succeed installing Linux to my book is certainly not due to its CPU. It's either the plattform or my talents. (Anything can go wrong. I have seen folks inserting CDs face down into drives and complain bitterly the shit does not work right ;<) ).
K.
comb
This notebook i have here was only build in pilot-quantities. It was one of the first Athlon-64 based books (from end 03) The design is an example how much can go awry in a notebook-design. Windows does not boot on it from a reg installation CD. Neither 2K nor XP. Wistrons system recovery is the only way to set a system up. Not sure if Kanopix can deal with such configuration. :)However, I got used to the book now. I just bought the third battery for it. I don't feel tempted to replace it now. Unless Microsoft ships a Ferrari to convince me I need Vista, that is. ;)
K.
Comb
No I didnt't. Tried another of Debian Version with a similar approach though, roughly two years ago on it, which did not work.
Maybe I give Kanotix a shot when I find time. Tx for the pointer.
K.
mike
I do some client-side development so having some experience with Vista would be good.
Sure. You can't avoid Vista then.
And I like to tinker around with new technologies. Even if I don't think highly of them.
Oh yes, i share this attitude. I am keen trying out Superfetch, ReadyDrive, Readyboost, and in particular DX-10. Thing is, Server 2003 SP1 has it all - without the policy of Vista. Aero-Glass does not interest me at all. Btw I still run W2K on my desktops. And I would on the notebook as well, but it does not install. Neither does any Linux. :(
If Dell would only drop the price of that 5600 X2 desktop by
about $200.... Guess it will. Maybe even more. By Q2.
K.
Thanks for the insight of google-mozilla. Sounds like fair deal.
mmoy
BTW, you can order x64 for $139 at Newegg right now and it includes an upgrade coupon for Vista. One of the Business versions. Sounds like a great deal given official Vista pricing.
Not for me, Mike. Actually, i would consider Vista too expensive even if it came for free. I like some of its features, though. DX-10 being the most important one, support of flash is another one. Going Server 2003 might be a reasonable way to deal with it. Same core, different policy, fair price (offered below $200). Do you see significant downsides of this route?
K.
Mike,
Certainly. To prevent from any misunderstanding, I would not mind to use a google-UI browser based on mozilla. As long as it remains open source, that is. I'd be glad if mozilla can make a ton of money with it, as well.
K.
comb
They rope their users in a different way than Microsoft does. To date they do it by moving faster than their competitors and doing a better job.
This is most exactly the picture i see as well. Seeing people roping other people is enough to produce cynical comments here. (When I do not comment cynically, it is often because it is done smart enough to rope me. :<( )
Open source is their friend.
Friendship is mutual per definition.
Is google the friend of mozilla as well iyo?
If yes, what makes you think so?
K.
comb
Heck, they might even ask mozilla to add certain features to their open sourced products in exchange for a chunk of cash.
That's what they already do, isn't it? ;>)
K.
comb
I am sure they would take the code tree and do it
I'm not a supporter of lynching per se. But if google ever would dare what you suggest i can see me looking around for a suitable tree... :)
K.
mike
Could you pls point us to one of your (or others you consider useful) ff-nightly-builts? I'd like to give it a shot... tia.
Btw i like V2, although frowning about resources it takes. Not a problem for me, currently. It's more the trend, you know.
On another note, I see google making a lot of inroads into browsing. It crossed my mind it is maybe just a question of time they will be coming up with a complete browser. Any indications for this in the ff-community?
K.
windsock
Amazing. Many thanks. K.
Windsock
I never disputed there have been dismissals. As far as I can see Judge Farnan dismissed 20 claims out of hundredsomething. But then, I already know most of these capital-letter shouting clowns are unable to count to four, so i really should not have expected the math for a fraction of a three-digit number to come any closer as "2/3RDS."
Oh and btw this was end of September, 26.
The rest has been in the press and on this thread for THE LAST SIX to twelve months.
Calendar counting is apparently also limited to rough estimates.
K.
Durl
The linc is in my post.
There is no link in your post.
On page three of the motion, it refers to the dismissed complaint.
Aha. Now it's "the dismissed complaint." Not 2/3 anymore. And I can't even find this reference on page 3 of the motion.
The rest has been in the press and on this thread for THE LAST SIX to twelve months.
Possibly. However what you keep repeating over and over on this thread does not make it true.
so I will not post to you again.
Not surprising. Slinking off is what you expect after capital letter - yelping.
K.
wbmw
You are still argueing things which have been ruled about already. I see no point in doing this.
K.
Durl
>You realize of course, that the peice of paper you are flopping around is 3 months old? Many have moved on.
Sure. The comment has been made in the context of a recent dicussion wrt document-evidence-conduct material. Maybe you did not follow.
THE JUDGE DISMISSED 2/3RDS of the AMD complaint for foreign acts of anti-trust on the theory that if the act was a foreign act affecting foreign customers, the proper venue is some foreign court.
U r using a lot of capital letters in your post. Even in bold. Shouting people are usually wrong. Could you please offer a link wrt dismission of complaints?
Your take on Special Masters motives of ruling is opinion and stands undisputed.
K.
wmbm
so now they are attempting to look abroad.
Sure. There is conduct material. And a ruling according to it. It sounds to me you don't like law. Why is that? Bad experience?
K.
AMD now heads towards evidence in its motion to compel. :)
http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/AMDCompel040107.pdf
K.
Windsock
Thanks for the link. The order is to produce foreign conduct material. Which obviously is another animal as evidence. Actually, any other term than what Special Master Popitti used seems to be inappropriate.
K.
wbmw, fingolfen, alan
At the end things are really very simple: I said Intel built four 65nm fabs, while it built only three 90nm fabs. Nothing less and nothing more.
I provided evidence for this statement.
Best of luck for any further attempts to convince yourselves four is not really four, but more like three. Apologies I won't be of any help in this respect, though. Additions within a range of one hand's fingers is one of my limited talents which i don't want to lose. :)
You have not answered WBMW's post regarding actual sq. ft. of fab space, market size growth, and die size growth...
Sure I did not. And i am not going into cadence-loops as well.
All I needed to prove was four fabs have been built. Because this was all I claimed.
K.
wbmw, alan, elmer
Later, Fab D1D transitions to 45nm, while D1C converts to 65nm.
Nope, mate. It is not "while". D1C conversion is a year earlier than D1D. So it is four, as I said. No more, no less. Unless you continue to ignore what Intel says in the link if it does not fit in your belief, that is. (Which is fine with me if that helps for you)
On a sidenote, while i don't feel inclined to comment on the plethora of ad personam attacks (let alone to counter it), these are even more telling than the mistake in your calculation.
K.
Alan, wbmw, fingolfen,
Will never have all four... and similar defences
Interesting to see you chaps deny whole fabs of Intel to be able to defend your belief.
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/manufacturing/manufacturing_at_a_glance.pdf
More details in here, but I can't make deep links from it.
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/307501/intel_microprocessors_intel_manufacturing.htm
K.
wbmw
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15934616
Public empirical data.
K.
alan
DD is identical for Core2 and Netburst. Complexity is different.
May I suggest another angle to look at it?
Intel built three 300mm-megafabs in its 90nm-node. From a diesize/DD angle one would expect two 65nm-fabs providing the same output. Account for substantial growth you end up with three 65-fabs. In fact, Intel built four. For a reason.
K.
elmer
You can only make yourself look foolish.
Maybe. If so, it is so. In this case I don't care. If I would, I could easily avoid this: Posting what Intellibees like to read on the intel thread, and what AMDroids like to hear on the AMD-thread is an easy exercise for me. Using two aliases, naturally. But this is not what i am out for.
Why would you attempt to lecture those who already know what you are only guessing at? Lol. These don't post. But they talk, fortunately.
If you had empirical data about Intel you wouldn't need to argue. You'd already know the answers.
Don't worry, I have more than enough empirical data about Intel.:)
K.
Elmer
You have everything to lose but what do you stand to gain?
1. What do you mean I could lose?
2. What makes you think you have any clue about things i am out for to gain?
You're not going to get and yield information out of Alan any more than you would get it from me. So why bother?
I don't bother at all. I have no lack of empirical data. If there is any lack it is the resources to process it.
K.
alan
I think most people mean defect density, as it impacts good die when they say yield
I agree most people mean this. In population, that is. Not those who design, or develop processes. They all know better.
really can't see where you are coming from on this one... It doesn't fit any yield model I have heard of.
Well if you heard of yield models at all this helps. Look at Bose-Einstein, and think different complexities for Netburst and Core2.
K.
elmer
Between here and SI you're not having a good day Klaus.
I hope this belief helps you over the night. :)
K.
Katie
I didn't understand the species Intel sowed? do you mean Core2? tx
Mhh. I must have missed the other species Intel sowed recently. :)
Sure it is Core2.
K.
wbmw
If you have proof that Core 2 has bad yields, or even a logical path of thought that you'd like to walk people through, either one would be a good choice to employ at this point.
I never ever said anything like bad yields. The message I tried to get across is Core2 architecture has lower yields than Netburst inherently, from its design. To put this in a relation, I believe Core2 has better yields than K8.
I tried my very best to walk you guys through what this is based on. But I am aware it is close to hopeless to do this in the frame of bb postings.
As for the idiot portion of your posting - feel free, if it helps. It takes more to insult me.
K.
spaarky
Oh boy. What makes you believe it would be up to me to do other's homework?
K.
Katie,
been pretty expressive in a dozen postings succeeding the one you linked to. Where specifically you have trouble to understand what I mean?
K.
elmer
I don't believe Intel has said this.
Not surprising. Anyway, Intel has plenty of slides out with it.
(Better don't look it up. It might disturb you. :) )
K.
Tenchu
Just like Banias isn't "pulling its own weight"?
Did I ever make this statement? If so, could you kindly point me to it?
Thanks.
K.
wbmw
Leaving aside obscuring apples to oranges comparisons of different segments, Apples to apples, the C2D transition is as fast as Northwood was, mirroring historical patterns. Ramp is faster.
K.
elmer
Do you have any evidence to believe this?
It is what Intel says, consistent with what i see in the markets so far, so I have no reason to doubt the part still to come will be different from Intels expectations.
K.
elmer
Certainly one implies the other, no?
Nope. Ramp and product transition is two pairs of shoes.
All you say is all right, however neither of it is new. So just compare product transition to Core2 to historical pattern. If it is not faster than historical, but wafer ramp is faster, think about why that is. :)
K.
On a sidenote wrt http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15915153
I am not sure it would be justified to throw me into the basket of SI-AMD-board's opinions you mentioned.
elmer
The C2D [ramp] is the fastest in Intel's history.
Is product transition as well? :)
K.