Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!


Discussion on Article:
Decisions of the "00s": Will the Past Define the Future?

Started by: BernardP | Date 12/31/11 09:24:56 AM
Comments: 208 | Last Comment:  09/01/16 06:03:20 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads


Knowing how things work in the corporate world, it's also possible that Mr Meyer was fired when it became obvious (internally at AMD) that, after years of hope and hype, Bulldozer would be a big disappointment. To further bolster that argument, other people lower in the corporate ladder, many in high level technical positions, were also fired shortly after Mr. Meyer.

Wrong choices were made in designing Bulldozer and those who made those choices had to pay. Simple as that.
0 0 [Posted by: BernardP  | Date: 12/31/11 09:24:57 AM]
- collapse thread

An obvious question is whether Rory Read can make the right decisions when designing microprocessors.
0 0 [Posted by: Anton  | Date: 12/31/11 09:56:55 AM]
The design decisions that lead up to bulldozer were made well before Dirk was CEO. If he hadn't forced the delay of 45nm bulldozer it would have been even more of a disappointment. The blame for that, as well as they delay of 65nm which threw off everything, rests on Hector
0 0 [Posted by: megamanx00  | Date: 01/03/12 11:57:41 AM]

I think it is a travesty, how there are the faculties of sociology and masters of social sciences and professors in every university, but the public attitude is to either make a TV program about sociological subjects, with a psychologist or an economist as their narrator, or to write subjective, uneducated guesses about the matters. This text is one of those guesses, with an index of corporate history depicted as the explanation of the social changes. as written by an IT graduate! This text isn't even done by a graduée of any other social sciences, the antropology, the economics, the psychology or the political science, which just shows the dismissive attitude about sociological research. That is not appropriate behavior.
0 1 [Posted by: TeemuMilto  | Date: 01/01/12 02:39:01 AM]
- collapse thread

Bud, with all your due respect, can you be more specific in your criticism. Honestly, I did like the read - not too deep, just easy reading for the holiday. It is just an editorial in an IT website that basically touched on prior editorials. You need to acknowledge this fact before you began reading, set your expectations accordingly, and try to get some insight that your sociology and/or social-economic prism does not allow you to see.
I work in a business world and I do have masters in that field and I do not come to xbitlabs or go to any other IT website to read about business. However, I do find, and appreciate, some of the industry insight, which on the surface might look very unorthodox and/or rudimentary, but because we, all (most of) the business people think similarly, sometimes overlook or do not identify at all. Therefore, read this article not as if it was written in the national sociological journal, but as if it was written on the, because it was. Hopefully, you will get more than just pure entertainment from it.
1 0 [Posted by: jonup  | Date: 01/02/12 07:22:38 AM]
What does sociological science / research have to due with an article on trends in technology and the associated technology industry.

Sociological science is total bullshit and should be dismissed, its almost a complete waste of time and is constantly proven to be wrong.

Only an economist would possibly have more insight into the issues discussed in this article.
1 0 [Posted by: cashkennedy  | Date: 01/02/12 07:33:00 AM]
Oh, that is total bullshit. If you are a student of economics, then should know that sociology and economics have a different objective to research. It is not proven false, because that would be better sociology.

The problem is the dominance, the hostile and exclusive attitude by the economists and the law school, mostly by these two groups, to all other science. You are everywhere, in the government, the media and on the top of the wage hierarchy. Don't you think you've had enough of influence already? And if it's not you two groups, then it is the psychologists, the third officially recognized science. You think that the world solution is law (maximum prosecution as a solution to the criminal type)/economics (free market)/psychology (the definition of mental illness just depend on the current values). And like is wrote, this is written by an IT specialist, who can only do worse. The IT industry is coasting the economists for social kudos.
0 1 [Posted by: TeemuMilto  | Date: 01/02/12 09:06:31 AM]
While I cannot agree with you more on the sociology as a science, I am very disappointed by the depth of your analysis. I sounded as if you pulled it off your ass. It's like one of those clichés the world is controlled by Jews or masons. Please tell me you do not think that all economist and layers got together and said we going to rule the world and will teach that to all the law and economics students so we can continue our rule. Is it true for all the layers - my dumb traffic attorney I use cause he's cheaper than me going to the court or a small town attorney in a third world country - or is it just as small number of Ivy League - in which case, I should be fine with my local judge who went to UM or EMU? Law exists to ensure that we can do business - in both senses: for-profit and personal/social - without worry about people that try to gain on the system. Remember law is not only for the criminal type but it can also be used to resolve disputes.
I am running out of time so I will be very short. Saying economics is bad because it promotes free market, is the same as saying Sandy Bridge is bad because it is so much better than anything else on sell out there. I am not going to dive into explaining why, but it will only take you reading a few introductory chapters of economics to understand why.
1 0 [Posted by: jonup  | Date: 01/03/12 05:02:43 AM]
There's another bullshitter. I get the feeling that you just want to make me feel inferior, and you think that you can get away with it. Under the innocent veil of this discussion of course. It is about the way how you talk about innocent issues. I'm worried about your manners and schemes, and how easily they are passed in today's society.
0 1 [Posted by: TeemuMilto  | Date: 01/03/12 10:12:58 AM]
Sorry, I did not want to hurt your feelings! You came up with some empty or irrelevent claims, I asked some basic questions to test the accuracy of your claims and you came up calling me names. Am I the bullshitter?
1 0 [Posted by: jonup  | Date: 01/04/12 04:50:50 AM]

Dissing the Dreamcast on graphics quality and development cost? You guys know better than that, don't confuse it with the Saturn. Considering the time it launched it was truly next gen. The problem they had was pissing of retailers (namely walmart) with the Saturn Launch, discouraging developers with poor Saturn tool support and it's short life span, Sony announcing the PS2 way early to get developers and gamers to hold out, and no EA games partly due to dual system development. The Dreamcast was good, but it wasn't enough to overcome the Sega's previous mistakes.

I also take issue with the comment on the ATI Radeon HD 3000 series. The point with the 3800 cards was to return to competition in the mainstream market. The 3870 X2 was more of an afterthought and did rather well (though claims as the fastest card were a bit dubious since it only beat the 8800 Ultra in a few tests).
1 0 [Posted by: megamanx00  | Date: 01/03/12 01:12:47 PM]

"whopping $399 in 1995. This price was too high [for 1995, with inflation adjustments it would have been around $799+ today"

$399 dollars from 1995 is about $584 dollars based on CPI. This is a big jump, but you don't need to use incorrect figures to overstate this.
0 0 [Posted by: TurtleBay  | Date: 01/22/12 11:09:54 AM]


Back to the Article

Add your Comment