everybody does, as long as you get to "all day computing" ...
@Crabby ... well, you don t get it, do you? you think that computers are good enough ... well, with your thinking, no internet, we will all be using TI57 calculators, and relays to calculate the trajectory to the moon ...
Competition is what drives the computer science hardware industry ... looks like you did not figure out the basics of the industry you try to express opinion about.
Competition is good! it is what drives evolution of technology.

To Francois and Surya, Cut the bull both of you. All we customers have to do is choose whoever we want! If you want to feed intel fine go with them. If you want AMD fine go with them.

I personally go with AMD because if they disappear intel would gouge us BIG time. If you must have the absolutely best perf then go with BIG I. If you think they are a rip off, go with AMD. If you think intel are making enough money (80% market share) give the underdog some money.

If you don't need best perf all the time go with AMD. If you want value for money, that's a little more interesting. If you need high perf go with intel.

If you need low-mid perf, go with whoever offers best value (I would think AMD but i could be wrong). AMD have been forced to take the low-mid perf range, but they know how to survive at that level.

Hopefully, now ATI has gone to 40nm for it's chips (4770 et al) the cpu's can follow suit. Unless they are thinking about doing something in the 32nm range (or 28nm) with GloFo. Anyway, whichever way it goes, may the people's choice always win, regardless of the idiots or fanboys.

So, first you come with a new design then you improve it where feasible, and after some time you come with another new design which will be improved afterwards.
Pretty much what people have been doing for quite some time now, but now it has a new PR name: "Tick-tock model".

It's amazing how people fall for these crap marketing names. First there were "thin clients", then they became "network computers" and now the hype is yet again being sold as "cloud computing".

But hey, only Intel can afford the "Tick-tock model" and only Google can make "cloud computing" a reality. Riiiight...

The spokesgoons response to what is better about AMDs platform than Intel's:

"Graphics, video and media"

Uhhh, aren't these just synonyms of the same thing? YEah 3D graphics AMD has Intel beat. Video, I don't really think most users are going to see any significant difference between X4500 and ATI's offerings even on Blu-Ray playback. Media? You mean audio AMD spokesdouche? I don't think AMD audio is any better than the integrated HD audio. Audio is a non-issue for almost all users especially on mobile platforms.

More marketing fluff from AMD.

I say that you are the man who come from the spawn of evil company. Intel as evil company have been using dirty tricks, fallacious act, and play against the law to repress the competition in Personal Computer Market with their microprocessor. BAPCO initially was an Intel sponsored company mainly for creating a benchmark that favour intel products and markup their performances with their ugly architecture like netburst. When AMD come with their performances leadership with their Athlon 64, BAPCO is used to defend the ugly performances with pentium 4 alongside using carrot and stick to hardware vendor and retail computer market and banned competitor altogether.

The truth is out there?
lol ...
you should change your ID to Mulder ... And Green Alien conspirancy theory too?

Will all articles stop ending with this symbol 'µ' its driving me mad

Your last comment is the prove that the notebook vendors still not confident to use the bapco benchmark even they add another features for additional power savings with their additional footnotes. And you think that AMD platform is bad you are too naive to. AMD had been the only voices about balanced paltform.
Above is the prove that you are the Intel spawn. Intel as an evil company wants that they are the only company to supply the chips to hardware vendor for all functions in the computers. Look at their legal statements, Intel wants to defend the monopoly and if that happens all IT consumer will be screwed without choices.

Surya, based on your last posting, you are saying "Why there are no computer vendors to gives the benchmark about the battery life for their products especially using the BAPco"

well, look better ...
http://www.acer.us/acer-v2/productv.do?LanguageISOCtxParam=en&kcond61e.c2att101=62288&sp=page16e&ctx2.c2att1=25&link=ln438e&CountryISOCtxParam=US&ctx1g.c2att92=447&ctx1.att21k=1&CRC=2595810646

"
8+ hour battery life*
Charge up once and go all-out from morning till night! The Acer PowerSmart key provides one-touch system-wide energy conservation, delivering 8-plus hours* of on-the-go notebook action.
* Based on Principled Technologies' benchmark testing, using Bapco's MobileMark 2007 Productivity test. Battery life varies depending on product specifications, computer settings, and applications or features launched, and may be reduced if Windows Aero™ is enabled. The Acer PowerSmart button must be enabled to achieve the 8+ hours. All batteries' maximum capacity diminishes with time and use. "

So, please , you obviously do not know what you are talking about, neither the VP...
I ll stop here.
this is my personal opinion.

Why there are no computer vendors to gives the benchmark about the battery life for their products especially using the BAPco. Computer vendors know that benchmarketing will slow down another their products since there are only two company that dominates the personal computer market. BAPco is useless in their marketing departement. Patrick Moorhead had new measurement for battery life as posted on the press release in AMD website.

Computer Science includes "science".
So, if Mister Moorhead wants to make a better benchmark, since he is part of the consorsium develloping MobileMark, he is welcome to join the meetings and come and explain his point of view. After all, he has a vote.

It is always easy to spit on what exist, I expect him to show up to the meetings, otherwise, please just don't speak about the problematic of something he obviously does not understand.

As somebody working on PC Performance every day, I can tell you that the problem mister Moorehead is trying so solve is much more complexe than his little 5 senses. The problem that he is talking about is the problem that the BAPCO people started to try to solve 10 years ago. If Mr P.M spend some brain cells on the problem, he is very likely to end up with something very very similar to MM07.

MM07 data correlate very well with hand times test ... but this, strangely, mister M forgot to tell you ...

"What a distressing contrast there is between the radiant intelligence of the child and the feeble mentality of the average adult" Sigmund Freud.

Again, this is my personal opinion, I do not represent my employer when posting here.

Patrick Moorhead is only concern about consumer advocacy in notebook and portable market. He nurturing them and give advices that related about battery life. He did not only care about his company product. He says that the current battery life benchmark is not appropriate in the real usages by the consumer. And you that intel is PAY another member to votes for the current test for battery life in BAPco benchmark so this benchmark favouring intel products. Democracy can be created to favour the HAVE like intel with their dirty money. Patrick Moorhead just want that to suggest to creates multiple benchmark with multiple workload francois. That's why notebook vendor had stay away for marketing about battery life for their products except the battery specifications like 6 cell or 3 cell because they know that the lifetime usages can be variable.

@LS:

Someone else has already studied the reasons why manufacturers (and retailers) chose not to carry AMD...

... such as South Korean, Japanese and European anti-trust authorities.

Just to be clear, In BAPCO, every workload introduced in a benchmark are voted by AMD, Apple, ARCintuition, Atheros Communications, CNET, Compal, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Lenovo, Microsoft, NVIDIA, SanDisk, Samsung, Sony, Toshiba, VIA Technologies, Incisive Media, ZDNet and Ziff Davis Media.
Each of them have a vote, and can vote yes or no ...
Saying that Intel is running BAPCO is sooo funny! don't you think VIA and AMD can turns the discussion if they have a valid point.
Most of the people in the list of companies inside bapco have interest to see the CPU price go down ... Do you really think Intel is running the show ... you are naive my friend, and you swallow too easily the words of a man who has a bad platform in his hand for battery life, and try to fud a very legitimate benchmark, developpe by a consorsium ... soon, he will try the sampe with SPECCPU ?

Let's stop the BS please!

This is my very personal opinion, but I see from very close that is happening there, This VP never ever showed up to voice his concerns ... hummm hummmm

So weener, let me get this straight - you call Pat Moorhead a moron for speaking up about computer makers use of deceptive numbers when reporting battery life? (With Intel's blessing, I might add, since Intel runs BAPCO)

With a screw the consumer mindset like that, I suggest you trot right over to Intel and get on their team.

The rest of us will cheer Moorhead on, as his efforts will ultimately pay off for _all parties concerned._ Except Intel, of course, because the numbers right now are completely slanted in their favor. Were real battery life standards used, Intel platforms would show major suckage.

It about the "Platform" when products suck.

Hey, here's an idea? Want more efficiency? Take out the Palladium DRM and the unique serial number you put into every chip, so you'll have less transistors to power.

Hey vondrashrek,

" no one cares what you say, vondrashek...

since your posts don't make sense at all. use simple plain english - it is not that hard!"

That is not true for some understand your simply complex multithreaded multicored plain english post perfectly well, or as perfectly well as they need.

And things are starting to get interesting ...... http://tinyurl.com/kjkqa2 .... with Intel being most likely the big loser in the Present Great Games set-up, and that then leaves the way for AMD and the Foundry founding fathers to flex their muscle and splash their oily flash cash to rewrite and produce a much Better and Greater Great AI Game to MUDdy the Waters and Offer Stealthy Cloud Operations .... Allahu Akbar and Amen to that.

Vorsprung durch AITechnIQ

People who aren't into tech simply don't care about platforms or sockets, etc. When they go to buy a PC they ask the salesperson which PC is faster. If the salesguy points toward Core 2, Intel gets the deal. If the sales guy says Phenom runs too hot and Core 2 is just ok, Intel gets the deal. It's that simple. They rely on what sales people say. And most people aren't techies.

Whoever builds a faster, cooler-running processor that doesn't burn a hole in your wallet gets the deal. This is not factoring in Intel's monopolistic business practices. That's another story.

Consumers only care about the goodness of the end products. AMD fails to persuade more producers (esp. most reputable ones in the industry) to use more of AMD's CPU/GPUs/chipsets in their designs. Who cares what are the CPU/GPU in iPhone? Basically, it is a performance/price game especially in this tough economic condition. If you have an advantage in performance/price, why do the producers not choose AMD? Maybe, AMD needs to study what are the main reasons underneath!

since your posts don't make sense at all. use simple plain english - it is not that hard!

vondashrek

AMD's koolaid apparently has delusional properties to it.

what a dunce! Do you mean to tell me that guy whipped consumers up into a frenzy over battery life only to have it backfire on AMD? OEMs dont tend to appreciate it when their chip supplier stabs them in the back...DOH!how does that guy still have a job?