Re: I guess your math might be fine for you. I prefer to consider quad-core products need twice the silicon as well.
Well, gee, Klaus. I guess you got me there. Looks like 2.66GHz quad core @ $530 has "not much premium" compared to 2.66GHz dual core @ $183, especially when you consider the difference in silicon. I mean, it's 2x the silicon of dual core, but Intel gets almost 3x the dollars. That's your argument, right...?
I guess your math skills speak for themselves.
Re: Hats off, you have all ingredients for a classical recipe: A misquotation, a calculation leaving out half the factors of the equation, surrounded by sneering ad personam talk to begin and conclude the posting. Well done! Keep it up! .-)
Yeah... I happen to think the quote was spot on, the calculations clearly included the margin value per core, and as for ad-hom, like all your responses of late, you seem to misuse words as they fit your trollish behavior.
Re: appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
I guess this doesn't apply, since you have demonstrated no intellect or reason in the first place for me to appeal to... just a gross generalization that was in direct conflict with the facts (the recipe for most of your posts, actually).
Re: attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.
Actually, I pointed out your character flaw, rather than attacked it, and at the same time answered the argument with data and reasonable logic. And all the latter is more than you performed in your last retort.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
