Misunderstanding.
I've never said that I want AMD to be "different". Sorry if you got it that way.
I precisely think AMD should stop building their strategy on a bet. For 10 years they've been betting that just around the corner is a highly multi-thread future.
Intel is giving us CPUs optimized for the actual tasks that are performed at the moment.
AMD gave us very expensive CPUs that are superior in fairly niche situations...
It doesn't matter. $300 is too much for a mainstream CPU. It doesn't matter how good is the performance. People want a CPU that will let them use a browser, an Office suit, Skype, some games and so on.
An i3 is already good for that. i5 is for those gaming in high resolution. i7 is already an overkill for most.
You're praising Ryzen as if everyone on the planet was doing WCG as a hobby.
Ryzen has multi-thread potential that - outside of specific tasks like movie encoding or simulations - is very difficult to use. This won't change fast enough for AMD to get a big audience. Intel will catch up - even just on their small but regular improvements with each generation.
It's not about if it is or not (and are you so sure?). It's about how far we are from this happening (assuming it will).