top 10 Intel mistakes

[Ali]

http://www.tuplay.com/display.asp?s=h&i=32&p=1

Ali

[The PIT]

Good read. Does getting to big and arrogant count?

[Wombat]

They forgot the division error. That's got to me number 0.99994523842346

I still can't believe such a crappy chip made it out. Oh wait, it's intel, yes I can.

[The PIT]

Now that makes think about an article about microsoft excel and it stats package that doesn't give the answers you expect.
Now how many poeple check that excel gives the right answers?

[dZeus]

It's clearly written by a Intel-hater (or AMD-lover), since a lot of the points on the list do not really belong there.

I would say, the real list should consist of item numbers:

#9 The cacheless Celeron fiasco. A processor castrated as much as the initial celerons are really a utterly stupid move by the marketing department.

#7 Building a Rambus chipset and making a hack, so that it is possible to run SDRAM on it isn't a good idea looking from the technical point of view

#2 The 1.13GHz P3 recall... a very obvious case of 'paper launch' of a CPU that is not yet ready for market introduction, only done to 'catch up' with the competitors.

#1 The rambus partnership was a chance with a _very_ high risc of failure, and they've probably learned their lesson by now.


With all the real problems, I more and more get the idea that these are mainly caused by a _very_ incompetent marketing staff. They better get rid of them completely, and should hire some people who are really up to the task of running Intel.

[impact]

Why do you think the first celeron o/ced so well. Because the cache was removed. I would call that a mistake.

Of course, the whole RAMBUS thing just got a bit out of hand.

[dZeus]

when it overclocks well, it doesn't mean it performs well... the cacheless Celeron was a horrible performer, and didn't have a long life because of all the criticism on it.

[Guru]

Still the original Celeron outperformed the P2 in almost all game benchmarks!

------------------
Join the MURC SETI team! | SETI @ MURC

Don't get even — get odd!

[impact]

Yes, in office apps it wasn't that great. But in games the speed was equal to a full-featured PII.

[impact]

Heheh, yes it was... I guess that's why so many people bought it and then they all became gamers.

[DentyCracker]

And if I remember correctly it was marketed as a *you_guessed_it* Business Processor