Sign in to follow this  
glug

Hp Ditching Intel For Amd?!?!

Recommended Posts

Cool. I still won't by their crap, but it's good to know there's an alternative to IBM for the AMD goodness.

Too bad Dell can't make the 'switch", or at least offer the option? Please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to buy all our computer equipment from HP - corporate policy. I'm glad this doesn't prevent us from using AMD chips (any more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. I still won't by their crap, but it's good to know there's an alternative to IBM for the AMD goodness.

Too bad Dell can't make the 'switch", or at least offer the option? Please?

You'd rather buy Dell than HPaq?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article is about HP replacing 95% of their existing Athlon XP line with A64's. It has nothing to do with Intel. You really should read more carefully before starting wild rumors like this one. Why on earth would HP dump the overwhelming market share leader in the portable market? Especially considering their very close ties with the Itanium development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. I still won't by their crap, but it's good to know there's an alternative to IBM for the AMD goodness.

Not everybody agrees HP's crap...

/casa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"In the coming cycle, 95 percent of what we offer will probably be Hammer 64"

Kind of confusing, eh? The journalist should have made clear it was 95% of AMD chips, not 95% of all chips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cool. I still won't by their crap, but it's good to know there's an alternative to IBM for the AMD goodness.

Too bad Dell can't make the 'switch", or at least offer the option? Please?

You'd rather buy Dell than HPaq?

So would I.

I tend to agree that HP=crap, but still, any tier 1 OEM picking up AMD is a good thing.

As to the comments about the article referring only to HP's AMD offerings: While it's true that it doesn't mention Intel at all in the article, nowhere does it specify that that 95% comment is only about the AMD lines. While you are probably right in the interpretation, it doesn't actually specifiy whether they mean 95% of the AMD systems they sell or 95% of ALL systems they sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I called it confusing.

I'd only buy Dell desktops. Never a server or a laptop. Compared to real servers/laptops they're junk. If someone gave me one for free I'd gladly take it and sell it to the next victim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd only buy Dell desktops.  Never a server or a laptop.  Compared to real servers/laptops they're junk.  If someone gave me one for free I'd gladly take it and sell it to the next victim.

give it a rest, dude. how many have you actually owned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"In the coming cycle, 95 percent of what we offer will probably be Hammer 64"

Kind of confusing, eh? The journalist should have made clear it was 95% of AMD chips, not 95% of all chips.

Confusing if you pull out one sentence from the entire article and quote it. Not if you read the entire article. There isn't one mention of anything Intel related in the whole article nor does the word Intel even appear in it and the entire paragraph before that quote is about HP phasing out the XP mobile lines for A64's. And come on, using common sense, do you really think HP would dump Intel based laptops considering their dominance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it says AMD is phasing out the Barton core (and hence XP mobile lines), not HP, but specifically states that HP will continue selling the XPs for awhile while AMD is phasing them out.

While your interpretation that they mean 95% of their AMD products will be changing to AMD64, not all or even all notebook products, is probably correct, it doesn't actually specify this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience, if you were to take a custom-built PC, a Dell, and an Hpaq of identical spec and perform a series of common tasks, they would finish in the order I listed. Hpaqs are just slower. I'll trust any Tier-1 about the same in terms of durability (except perhaps IBM, who I hold in higher regard and can't affort 90% of the time). The lower end of the performance reliability standard is full of systems, including e-machines, and used to be propped up by Packard Bell systems at the low end.

Just my experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd only buy Dell desktops.  Never a server or a laptop.  Compared to real servers/laptops they're junk.  If someone gave me one for free I'd gladly take it and sell it to the next victim.

give it a rest, dude. how many have you actually owned?

Owned? None, thank god! I've had to support a number of them and never liked them. The desktops are ok, laptops and servers average. Only the desktops I'd buy because they're often ridiculously cheap. For a server or laptop I want something more decent and well supported. Dell support and sales in many parts of Europe seems to be sub standard to say the best.

If I were to buy a server it'd be IBM or HP. Never, ever Dell. The crap their tech support gave me on several occasions is stunning. Same for laptops. At least in a desktop it's easy to replace parts on your own. HP support isn't fantastic either but way better. IBM is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to keep in mind is "you can't judge a company by their desktop computer line" (or something like that).

Compaq has, for example, traditionally made desktop systems which were among the most vile, evil, poorly designed pieces of junk since Packard Bell. Because of this, I long held the mentality that Compaq = crap.

When I later used a Compaq Professional Workstation, I changed my mind. It was a fine piece of engineering, and mysteriously ran Windows NT 4.0 with more "snap" than any system I have used before or since. (some proprietary optimization/cheat?). The systam had a P3 Xeon, and far faster systems (Athlons, early P4 Xeons) could not compare in responsiveness (though actual throughput was a different story. Large compiles were rather slow).

HP is similar in some ways. I haven't actually used any of HP's x86 servers, but their (soon to be phased out) PA-RISC line is rock-solid. If HP-UX didn't suck so much, I might try to get one for my home server. :)

Compaq, similarly, made the Nonstop Himilaya line. While I've never even seen such a system, everyone I've spoken with that has used them expressed almost shock at how reliable they were. One story that I believe I may have read on SR was of a Nonstop that fell over on its side (these are big systems, too) in a server room that had flooded due to plumbing problems. Apparently, it kept chugging right along.

HP now owns this line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can speak very well of Compaq's servers, I used to use them exclusively. Still have a bunch of ML530s sitting around. This is my first shot at Dell servers, we'll see how they do (If I win the job).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why on earth would HP dump the overwhelming market share leader in the portable market?  Especially considering their very close ties with the Itanium development.

Yes, because there are so many Itaniums used in portable devices. :D

(just giving you a hard time -- I know what you meant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the early ml350s are like the most unnecessarily large cases on earth heh

ML350? We're still running a 14U* ProLiant 6000 for our main departmental server! Mercifully, it should be replaced by the end of the year.

*That's 45cm wide by 63cm high by 59cm deep, for those of you who don't know rackmount sizes. See Compaq's ProLiant 6000 page for a picture of the tower version. The ML350 is here for comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But has anyone seen this then:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14590

According to this article HP is insisting on recieving 32 bit Athlon64 cpu's not to confuse their costumers!!

That is GREAT! HA!

Although it seemingly contradicts the "95% of all laptops" article, at least someone recognizes very few people *need* 64-bit...and since 64-bit Windows is not shipping, why bother?

HPaq *could* include the 64-bit chips and just not promote their "64-bitness."

Man...if AMD actually does this I'll take back all of the good things I've been thinking about them in the last year or so.

How much of AMD's business goes to HP? Or is AMD trying to buy into the Itanium market?

BTW, the original article most definitely is talking about laptops. The entire article is about laptops. No other products are mentioned. How could anyone construe anything else?

Dogeared

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this