I agree that AMD is no match for Intel's resources, at least for now. However, I do not agree AMD is chasing "Blind Ambition" that needs negative "Reality Check". In fact, if we gauge the growth of this company from being 1 of the clone x86 microprocessor companies to later become the only survivor in x86 CPU market and the strongest competitor for Intel, should we call these achievements a product of "Blind ambition"?
In fact, the author of this article should discuss how AMD can sell survive market competition by using process technology an generation older than Intel (65nm vs 45nm) yet still staying relevant. To be fair, AMD might go default without financial injection from ATIC but that doesn't justify by viewing an catching-up company as desperate. The fact is, the latest flagship Intel CPU codename Nahalem, pocesses architecture similarity (i.e embedded memory controller, point-to-point communication bus like HT3 etc.) that AMD've been using a years ago.
It'd be a blind review if the author compare the resources of Intel to AMD and come to conclusion that AMD is not wise to continue competition & chase her dream. If it happen, Mr. Bolaji may need to pay uncompetitive price for a computer to write his articles in future if Intel remain a sole microprocessor producer.
A Book For All Reasons Bernard Cole1 Comment Robert Oshana's recent book "Software Engineering for Embedded Systems (Newnes/Elsevier)," written and edited with Mark Kraeling, is a 'book for all reasons.' At almost 1,200 pages, it ...