On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, at 12:24pm, Rich C wrote: > The fact that VIA's implementation of the AGP specification is flawed ...
I was not aware of this. Please elaborate. > ... or their AC97 sound codec is worthless has nothing to do with the > board manufacturer. Their cheap onboard sound is cheap onboard sound, same as the i810's cheap onboard sound is. I'm using the VIA AC97 in my Athlon system at home, and it works fine for the casual uses I put it to (playing MP3s, mainly). VIA never claimed AC97 was anything but an entry-level solution. > I'm saying that Intel is still the "reference standard" like it or not. So Intel says Intel is the "reference standard". I am not impressed. > If a software program works on Intel, and not on AMD, they will first > blame AMD before blaming themselves. And when it doesn't work on Intel, "they" will find someone else to blame then, too. I do not put any stock in finger-pointing games. As the Jargon File puts it, when people start pointing fingers, all the user gets is the finger. :-) > As far as your Linux comment goes, that is irrelevant. No, it is not. I'm not talking about buying stock in AMD or who is going to sell more chips. I am talking about who has the better product. > Any processor bugs are more than masked by failures in the OS and the > software that runs on those processors. By that logic, the quality of the processor is completely irrelevant, which invalidates any arguments for or against any particular vendor. > Servers are expected to run continuously, 24/7, under anything from idle > conditions to heavy loads. ECC RAM, SCSI RAID, redundant power supplies, > UPS, Intel processors and Linux or BSD all go towards the reliability and > continued functionality of these machines. You logic is faulty. Yes, servers need to be more reliable. And yes, servers use Intel chips more often than AMD chips. However, given that, you cannot draw the conclusion that Intel chips are more reliable, for there are numerous other factors that influence the result. In this case, marketing and market share *is* a significant factor. Put more succinctly: The fact that Intel has more market muscle than AMD does not mean they automatically have a better product. > And yes it IS all who has the bigger marketing budget and the largest > market presence. I guess you have different criteria than I do. I am interested in performance, price, and functionality. You appear to be interested in perception, blame, market-share, and other things that do not actually indicate the quality of the products under discussion. :-) -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not | | necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or | | organization. All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | ***************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the text 'unsubscribe gnhlug' in the message body. *****************************************************************
