Replies to post #44899 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[I_banker]

Fastpathguru, thanks for yet another link. This discussion is not about facts -- if it were my rather innocuous post would not have generated such a visceral reaction from Chipguy, particularly since it was not even addressed to him. This is about Chipguy feeling belittled, because he percieved that I was belittling his precious IPF, and acting up.

The facts I stated were well known and as Mas has pointed out even espoused by Chipguy in the not so distant past. As to the other point he was harping on, if you follow the thread which quoted the Intel General Manager predicting 100K IPFs shipped in 2004, you will see Chipguy was involved in that thread -- and that was approximately a week ago.

I find it amusing that Chipguy resorted to name calling in his post -- particularly when he knew both my facts were true. It only goes to show how angry he must have been.

[chipguy]

Do I have to point out the obvious yet again? Gwennap
was not an Intel employee nor spoke for Intel. He was
a writer/analyst for Microprocessor Report. Was MPR
then or at any time affiliated in any way with Intel? Again
the answer is no.

The article was a mixture of disclosed news about the
Intel/HP alliance and a lot of speculation by Gwennap.
Since there was not the slightest suggestion of IA64
replacing x86 in any Intel press release or any other
official corporate communication in 1994 or since it
is obviously a piece of unsubstantiated speculation by
Gwennap. In fact, it was later picked up by EE Times
and other trade press and is probably the source of a
lot of the mythology that persists to the present day.

[Golfbum]

Other than an presumption by MPR where does it actually quote a senior management employee of Intel saying IPF replaces x86.

I didn't see a quote. I saw commentary not reporting.