Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[belgiangenius]

Elmer Phud:

The QS strategy could only have been successful after time had elapsed and it had been proven as a fair and accurate reflection of real-world performance.

Unfortunately, as with all similar schemes of the past with companies such as Cyrix, it was used as an opportunity to commit fraud against the public. An XP 3200+ doesn't even come close to a 3.2Ghz PIV, so we need not even discuss why the + exists.

However, I have fundamental problems with the whole concept. As a microchip maufacturer, why do you want to base your naming convention on an idea that implicitly sets SOMEONE ELSE'S product as a benchmark? If I market a new sports car, would it be wise to name it the XCOMPANY Porsche 911+? Why not just buy the Porsche if the name itself suggests that we're only trying to live up to the Porsche and the Porsche is superior? A company like AMD will only gain wide market acceptance and recognition by DISTINGUISHING its product, not attempting to piggy back it on the expectations of the competition. A MAC G5 is called a MAC G5 because people have come to expect that the MAC G line offers competetive performance when compared to the competition, and a much more stable and useful operating environment. To call the new MAC a 3200+ would only be an insult to MAC and an admission that the product is inferior.

BG