Now come on, Intel is the better platform at the moment and are the industry leaders in the commercial sector, AMD control a larger part of the server market but im not sure for how long. Considering that AMD/ATI have drivers on certain cards which leaves much to the imagination, i think Nvidia, even though they dont always get it right, are a better choice, plus to combat nvidia, ATI had to stick 2 GPU's on a card, wtf?
You dont think people should be free to choose their own brand loyalty like in every other market on earth?
Whether one is better than the other (in your opinion), they both work perfectly on a DOS, Windos XP or a Unix machine.
The AMD machine is working for Al (he says its fast as fook)
Clearly its vista which has the problem.
The IBM PC has been the only real computer standard since the 1980s.
Before then there were multiple sets of hardware with multiple standards, some far superior to the IBM standard (for example a UK company called apricot).
Consumers will not put up with blurred standards for very long. Something which works on one PC has to work on the next, or there will be trouble.
Forcing people into spending money just to stand still is a dangerous game.
Microsoft are entirely sales driven, meaning the operating system doesnt need to work, people just need to buy it for it to be considered a success. (even if they are forced into buying it, and hate it)
That will work in the short term, because they have such a high market share.
But if they did something crazy like discontinue availability of XP, people would be looking for alternatives very quickly.
