Re: Intel vs AMD x86-64

[Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com>]

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Any Intel people on this list: tell your managers to be f*cking ashamed of
> themselves. Just because Intel didn't care about their customers and has
> been playing with some other 64-bit architecture that nobody wanted to use
> is no excuse for not giving credit to AMD for what they did with x86-64.
> 
> (I'm really happy Intel finally got with the program, but it's pretty 
> petty to not even mention AMD in the documentation and try to make it 
> look like it was all their idea).

I couldn't have put it better myself. Were it polite to attach sounds to 
mailing list posts, I would add thunderous applause to my approbations.

Intel chips have been a part of my professional life for a very long 
time; I've never owned an AMD processor, and I'm certainly not one of 
their fanboys. I've worked closely with folk at Intel on some projects, 
and they have been quite generous at times. Some fine technologists work 
for them.

But on a corporate level, Intel has disappointed me with their arrogant 
failure to give credit where credit is due.

Last week, before Intel's announcement, I ordered a new Linux 
workstation. As a "lone wolf" consultant, I sometimes agonize over 
whether I make the right decisions when buying equipment. In this case, 
I feeling pretty dang good: the new system will arrive with a pair of 
Opterons on the motherboard.

-- 
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Software Invention for High-Performance Computing