[MRD]

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/200.../dell_q3_miss/

Dell missed their earnings estimates. Experts speculate that it's because of increased in AMD's opteron line and Dell's intel-only stance.

[koss20100]

Ya never really liked dell for there bias stance and not offering there customers a option.

[MRD]

I agree. I don't like corporations using their power to enforce monopolies. They should give people a choice.

I love seeing them getting punished for trying to force consumers to buy one product over another.

[muddocktor]

Dell has traditionally been all Intel but Dell also has been known to use the threat of AMD systems to keep their prices from Intel in line. Before now, they have been able to get away with this policy due to Intel having at least a fully competitive solution to anything AMD has put out, but now they are finding that in the server market, AMD is making a truly superior product compared to the Xeon. And from all the recent news, this turn of events isn't about to change in the near future. I just wonder how long Dell will be able to keep from offering at least a multi-cpu Opteron server, with the Opteron's performance and thermal/power advantage over Xeon (especially in the 4 way configuration). If they lose more market share on the server side to the competition that is selling Opty multi-cpu servers, I wouldn't be surprised to see a new server line coming from them. On the consumer side, the P4 systems they sell are at least in the ballpark, performance-wise, with the AMD systems being sold. I don't see nearly the pressure from the competition in consumer computers that I see in their server line.

[MRD]

It's pretty hard to deny that atm, AMD is faster, by a good amount. An article I read states that that is likely to continue at least through 2009. That's a ways off. If Dell doesn't start offering AMD machines, people who want the very fastest will not be able to get a Dell.

I think Dell will have to reevaluate their Intel-only stance in the light of their most recent numbers.

[wandl]

with black friday coming up and end of quarter for Dell, this means more "hot" deals from Dell! I'm already broke...

[rseven]

Everyday there are more cracks appearing in the foundation of the Intel monopoly. Why this by no means is the fall of the house of Intell, it could mean a more open and competitive market place where Intel's monopolistic power is curtailed. That would be good news for all consumers.

[Malpine Walis]

Well, just to be technical, Intel has never had a monopoly on the market. A traditional monopoly is one where you can only buy from one source. The best example would be your utilities. The gas company puts gas in one end of the pipe and you buy it at whatever price the government allows them to sell it for.

The market for processors is more of an oligopoly where Intel could technically double prices for the next generation but they won't. If they did that, then AMD would be able to run up their prices and pay off some of the massive debt that they have incurred trying to keep up with Intel. On the other hand, Intel could half their prices for a while and force AMD to go into bankruptcy. Once that was done, Intel would have a true monopoly and they could charge whatever price they felt like.

Of course, if intel then decided that processors should cost $1,000, Motorola/IBM/Transmeta would then find a ripe market for the picking and that would kick off another cycle of price cuts. Obviously, Intel will not do that as the devil you do know is better than the one you don't. Far better to keep AMD around and with just enough cash to stay in business.

But apart from that, yes, it is always good to see when Intel misses a market target and AMD gets the boost. Especially in something like a server chip where the markup is higher than for a consumer chip. Of course, at the best of times, servers are a fairly small part of the market. Even so, when AMD gets a temporary infusion of cash (especially at a time like this when Intel is not willing to move on the Pentium M), this means that AMD can climb just a bit further out of the hole that they are in. It would take more than one missed tareget in Intel's part for AMD to actually break free of the situation. Even then, they could drop back in just by making their own screw ups, which sadly they seem to be all too able to manage.

However, if they did ever get a deal with Dell, it could well put tehm in a fairly good position after some time. They already have as many actual buildings as they need, now if they could afford to fill them with the steppers that could do the 65nm process, they could possibly move up in the market enough to make a decent stab at a goal like 30% market share. If they could only get there and maintain the situation for about two years, then they might have a decent chance at casting off the strings that Intel uses to play them like a puppet.

[koss20100]

Originally Posted by MRD

It's pretty hard to deny that atm, AMD is faster, by a good amount. An article I read states that that is likely to continue at least through 2009. That's a ways off. If Dell doesn't start offering AMD machines, people who want the very fastest will not be able to get a Dell.

I think Dell will have to reevaluate their Intel-only stance in the light of their most recent numbers.

u mean this article ?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10...tel_xeon_2009/

[AdvanS13]

Originally Posted by koss20100

Ya never really liked dell for there bias stance and not offering there customers a option.

the customer has an option, that option is not to buy dell, it's not like they're forced to buy just dell. there is gateway, hp, etc....usually the average joe doesn't give a hoot what's inside the box, they care about the price.

[rseven]

Originally Posted by AdvanS13

the customer has an option, that option is not to buy dell, it's not like they're forced to buy just dell. there is gateway, hp, etc....usually the average joe doesn't give a hoot what's inside the box, they care about the price.

Yes, they have a choice, but at Dell their choices are limited. Some folks would only buy a Dell because they believe the advertising.

[AdvanS13]

i guess we should say a "potential" customer

[MRD]

Many non overclocker people suffer from the delusion that the only good PC's are Dell, and that everything else is second rate. When it's time for a new PC, they just think Dell. That means that a large chunk of the market that would be open to AMD is not.

I would like to see Dell selling both Intel and AMD as I want AMD and Intel to be as competitive as possible,with similar market shares. It keeps processor costs down for all of us. If it weren't for AMD, can you guys even imagine what processors would cost? Not to mention the inferior performance.

[OcX]

Dell losing money? WTF?

What kind of discount does Intel offer Dell? Does this discount somehow contribute to low cost/ low pricing?

Can AMD guarantee the SAME SUPPLY rate at bulk/cut throat pricing that Intel can?

Answer those, and you have your answer.

[MRD]

AMD doesn't have to supply at the same rate. I don't think anyone is suggesting that Dell stop selling Intel and move to AMD. They should just offer consumers the option of AMD or Intel.

AMD chips are faster right now, and as long as Dell uses only Intel, Dell computers will be slower than competitors'.

[koss20100]

Actually i belive they should be able to keep up demand at this moment but if they cant the def can in the future

Originally Posted by extremetech.com

Chartered to Meet Additional Demand
Although AMD currently manufactures its microprocessors at a single fab, a second, Fab 36, is nearly complete next door to AMD's Fab 30 in Dresden, Germany. Scheduled to come on line early next year, the fab will initially produce 90-nm wafers but quickly shift over to 65-nm lines, said Daryl Ostrander, senior vice president of logic and manufacturing.

Through a partnership with Chartered Semiconductor – and IBM, who helped refine the manufacturing process – AMD will be able to pass excess demand onto Chartered, which Ostrander characterized as a "flex fab".


Read more AMD news and reviews on ExtremeTech here.

Scheduled to come on line in 2006, Chartered's lines will be able to supply roughly 10 million processors in 2006 and about 30 million in 2007, according to a chart Ostrander displayed. Chartered will supply 65-nm chips in 2007.

Ostrander said that refinements to AMD's Automated Precision Manufacturing strategy would allow the company to react extremely quickly to possible glitches, and that some elements of the technology would be installed at the Chartered facility. A formal process of "continued technology improvement" will help AMD install new technologies using manufacturing processes. Meanwhile, 45-nm development is on track, he said.

[Beginner]

Originally Posted by MRD

Many non overclocker people suffer from the delusion that the only good PC's are Dell, and that everything else is second rate. When it's time for a new PC, they just think Dell. That means that a large chunk of the market that would be open to AMD is not.

I would like to see Dell selling both Intel and AMD as I want AMD and Intel to be as competitive as possible,with similar market shares. It keeps processor costs down for all of us. If it weren't for AMD, can you guys even imagine what processors would cost? Not to mention the inferior performance.

i have a part time job after school with the telecommunications/networking firm.

all pc-workstations/servers are dell
all fax machines, small printers/network printers are hewlett packard.
all hubs/routers/bridges are linksys/cisco

because their customers are consumed by the hype. my boss says that the compaq proliant servers( i think thats what they are called) or very good, well priced units but most of their customers don't want them, even if they are cheaper.

most users believe intel is the only chip manufacturer, when you mention amd they automatically think its inferior or have never heard of it.(this was me before i registed at ocforums.com sept. 04 ).

i hope dell carries amd products so pricing becomes more competitive.

[darthdana]

If only AMD could "lose" money like Dell. I think a lot of companies would love to miss the projection and still make a profit. Until AMD get that second fab flowing chips like water, Dell (if they offered AMD) would miss their projections due to shortages or more likely lower margains.

[MRD]

It's scary how much of the computer industry is fuelled by ignorance. People actually think Dell makes the best computers, when in reality, they are the cheapest and lowest quality. They think that Intel is faster than AMD, when AMD has a huge lead in processor speed and more innovative 64 bit design. Brand names only mean anything because people are morons.

[Audioaficionado]

Originally Posted by MRD

It's scary how much of the computer industry is fuelled by ignorance. People actually think Dell makes the best computers, when in reality, they are the cheapest and lowest quality. They think that Intel is faster than AMD, when AMD has a huge lead in processor speed and more innovative 64 bit design. Brand names only mean anything because people are morons.

The vast majority of people are sheep for the fleecing. They may grumble but they keep coming back to the gas pumps for more of the same.
Look at what magazines sell the most in supermarkets. It sure isn't Time or Newsweek. It's mostly the crappy rumor mags like Star, The Enquirer and People Magazine.

People only remember that Intel inside jingle or Dell ads and when they get ready to pull the trigger, that's the first brands that come to mind. WalMart is selling a lot of other brands and maybe that's undercutting Dell's market share lately. Even under ideal conditions, computer makers are running very slim profit margins.

So it's a good thing that Dell is getting spanked. However I think it may be more the result of high gas prices than AMD though.