Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz
I wrote the whole post it's unfortunate you had difficulty reading it which was whole lot easier than writing it. You obvious are not from the working class or you would "get it".
|
I hope this isn't directed towards me, or I might have to unleash the Kraken...
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz
Do you think AMD can produce for $240 a cpu that can beat cpus ' costing two and three times as much and have double the L1 L2 and L3 cache sizing . Their designs are based on what is feasible cost-wise at the mid-200's range. When they can achieve greater market penetration at that level then they can move on to higher level cpu's. That is NOT likely anytime soon.
|
That was exactly my point. It was cost-prohibitive for them to keep sinking money into the niche top tier of CPU's where Intel consistantly beats them. From a business perspective they were playing to their strengths and increasing focus and resources on the products they had that were selling great already; low and mid-range CPU's and APU's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz
The wintel monopoly has been going on for years now with the blessing of the whorish politicians and judges they own. Tell me how many judges in cases involving Intel and Microsoft have shares in both companies. Many of them. Did one recuse themselves from hearing their law suits who owned stock in the two monopolists? NOT a single one. That is exactly why these criminal enterprises, which should be prosecuted under Rico statutes, continue to get a free ride on our backs with their overpriced products. And I only have one valid point? Get out of here! Get thee to a nunnery!
|
Judges lack of recusal isn't exclusive to the Tech Industry. I think there does need to be more oversight to ensure that judges don't have some kind of direct or indirect gain from the outcome of cases which they preside over, but that is a problem with the 'game', not the 'players'. As for stock ownership, it's hard to find a lot of portfolios that don't include stock in companies like Microsoft. They are one of those "safety" companies that investors dump money into because the risk is so low. I doubt any of the judges short sold metric fucktons of stock to turn huge profits--the SEC would have pressed charges immediately.
Also, RICO was not designed for something like that. You'd have a hard time getting a RICO case against multiple corporations in multiple fields without concrete evidence that they all colluded with one another. Something like the "resetting" of Hard Drive prices could possibly be packaged as a RICO case, but nothing like what Intel and Microsoft do.
Only one of your points was valid because only one of them related to what we're supposed to be talking about. This is a Tech Enthusiast forum, if you want to preach about Macroeconomics, Political Affiliations, and the Justice System, go elsewhere.