Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

AMD; Down On It's Luck Again

Filed under
Hardware

Those of us aware of AMD's tremendous potential as a chipmaker have to be disappointed by Apple's recent news that it has chosen Intel as the sole chip provider for its Macintosh computers. In addition to the Apple news, AMD continues to strike out many of the world's largest PC OEMs, such as Dell. If the Apple news is true, this would come as a yet another financial hit to AMD and its strategies. Unfortunately for AMD, it is trapped in a vicious circle of supply and demand.

While manufacturers like Dell, Apple and others do care about performance, value and possible alternative chip suppliers, they always have a difficult time picking AMD as a supplier. The reason is clear: limited supply. Larger OEMs like Dell (and even Apple) demand high volumes of chips to fulfill its orders. Since AMD can't provide such quantities, it's hindering its own success in the market. We can't exactly blame AMD with this because it has to work with the limited financial resources it has.

The vicious cycle for AMD operates somewhat like this: AMD wants to expand à AMD can't expand due to limited revenue à AMD proposes OEMs to offer PCs equipped with its chips à OEMs decline due to lack of enough chips à AMD is back to square one. Clearly, this is neither AMD's nor the OEM's fault. AMD wants to supply its chips, but OEMs need enough quantity to cover the millions of PCs they retail annually.

Since Intel's business ventures go beyond making processors, it can cope with the costs of opening new fabrication facilities, thereby increasing production and offering better deals to OEMs that need to purchase quantities in the millions. Additionally, Intel can accept some losses in its chip business here and there, while AMD really can't.

Though OEMs, including Apple, are aware of the architectural issues with Intel's microprocessors, it's not much of a concern to them. The majority of the market they retail to isn't aware of the issues, and the systems are "fast enough" for the customers they are targeting. How much of the general computing population do you think will know the performance difference between dual-core Intel and AMD microprocessors? Yes, that's right - not very many. The main thing many customers are looking for is affordability and brand recognition, and Intel can definitely offer that.

Full Story.

More in Tux Machines

Kodi 14.0 Helix Unwinds

Merry Christmas and happy holidays, everyone! We are proud to announce the release of Kodi 14.0, which comes with a new name, a new logo, and a wide variety of new features, but underneath the new coat of paint remains the same software we all love. A detailed changelog for Kodi 14 can be found under milestones on our code repository, should you be interested. With that said, let’s take a look at some of the features that come with Kodi 14.0. Read more

KaOS ISO 2014.12

KaOS is very proud to announce the availability of the December release of a new stable ISO. This ISO marks two major milestones for this distribution. Since it’s inception almost two years ago, a need to be ready for UEFI installs has always been a priority. That was tied though to getting a modern Qt based installer that could handle such UEFI installs. With this ISO, both are implemented. Read more

Old FOSS Friend & Foe Represents Sony in Hack

Boies, along with three attorneys representing the States, brought Microsoft to it’s knees — or so it seemed at the time. On November 5, 1999, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found that Windows dominance on the PC made the company a monopoly and that the company had taken illegal actions against Apple, Java, Netscape, Lotus Notes, RealNetworks, Linux, and others in order to maintain that monopoly. He ordered Microsoft broken in two, with one company producing Windows and another handling all other Microsoft software. As we all know, Judge Jackson’s solution was never implemented. Although an appeals court upheld the verdict against Redmond, the breakup of the company was overturned and sent back to the lower court for a review by a new judge. Two years later, in September, 2001, under the Bush Administration, the DOJ announced that it was no longer seeking the breakup of Microsoft, and in November reached a settlement which California, Connecticut, Iowa, Florida, Kansas, Minnesota, Utah, Virginia and Massachusetts opposed. The settlement basically required Microsoft to share its APIs and appoint a three person panel that would have complete access to Microsoft’s systems, records, and source code for five years. The settlement didn’t require Microsoft to change any code or stop the company from tying additional software with Windows. Additionally, the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code. Read more

Study: ‘European Parliament should use open source’

The European Parliament should use free software and open standards for all of its ICT systems and data, concludes a study by the EP’s Greens/European Free Alliance: “That is the most appropriate way for the Parliament to meet its own standard of ‘utmost transparency’.” Read more