Re: so verbatim repeating another seemingly intel pr source is different from being a pr source, how again ?
Analysts are quoted all the time in these articles, including the Intel biased, the AMD biased, the anti-AMD, the anti-Intel, and of course the very rare non-biased variety. If you have an issue with Jim McGregor's quote, you should have taken issue with him, not the journalist who used his quote.
Re: how many times does she need to quote "intel is gonna catchup" in her non-editorial editorial ?
She concludes by giving AMD the benefit of the doubt: "Of course, the proof is in the pudding. AMD won't stand still, waiting for Intel to catch up. And Intel will need to keep to its products roadmap and to execute well to make 2006 the year when it finally responds to AMD's challenge."
Re: why do you feel the need to defend every seemingly intel pr outlet ?
I am not defending the article, but rather Chipdesigner's depiction of the author as a "whore". There is no reason to use this kind of profanity, especially since the author was merely quoting somebody else. If you are going to call every author of a positive Intel article a "whore", then how are you any less biased than what you are accusing me of?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
