For Dell and AMD, a tantalizing question

(continued from previous page)

Getting closer all the time?
Despite the fact that both AMD and Dell are two of the largest tech companies in the Austin, Texas, area, Dell has only begrudgingly warmed to AMD. At Comdex in 1997, Michael Dell and AMD founder Jerry Sanders ran into each other briefly on the show floor. The two shook hands and smiled.

A few moments later, Dell walked over to CNET News.com reporters and said, "The problem is that these guys (AMD and another chipmaker, Cyrix) always come in at the end of the cycle. What's the point?"

Starting in 1999, IBM, Gateway, Compaq Computer and others began to adopt the first Athlon processors in consumer desktops, renewing, or in some cases opening, a relationship with AMD. Dell did not. Subsequently, price cuts by Intel prompted many of these companies to drop their AMD boxes.

A slight thaw, however, seemingly began to take place in 2001 and 2002. During those years, Michael Dell and other executives began to state publicly that the company tested AMD parts in its labs. Previously, Dell would often officially decline to discuss the subject.

Dell executives also began to publicly and privately question Intel's Itanium chip, and Dell initially declined to adopt the Itanium 2. Meanwhile, they started to make positive statements about the coming Opteron chip. In April 2002 at a Merrill Lynch conference, Dell and Sanders shook hands and chatted with each other for a while after a speech by Dell.

"We're very interested and we're looking (at Opteron) and there's not much more to say about it in public," said Dell.

For his part, the flamboyant Sanders made a bold prediction that same afternoon. Dell would adopt Hammer, the code name for Opteron at the time, or Intel would come out with a chip that could also perform the same 32-bit/64-bit functions. About six months earlier, Sanders called such a chip from Intel "my worst nightmare."

Unfortunately for AMD, the second half of the prediction came true. After asserting several times that it would not come out with such a chip, Intel in February 2004 announced that it would put 64-bit functionality in Xeon.

"Had Intel not introduced the 64-bit technology when it did, that might have pushed Dell over," said Brookwood, who noted that Intel demonstrated its first 32/64-bit chips on a Dell workstation.

Still, things may be lining up for AMD. Benchmark testers and, more importantly, customers like Sandia National Labs give Opteron high marks. The technical advantages, while modest individually, may begin to accumulate.

And Dell continues to provide optimistic statements about AMD.

"They have been doing better," said Rollins, "than they ever have done before."

Mmm, okay.

It's nice to hear that Dell is FINALLY warming up to AMD on the bussiness end, but what about the home-user end? I, for one, don't buy PCs with Intel chips in them, and never plan to, so what will ever intice me and those geeky AMD lovers like me to buy into Dell?

[BlueInWI]

Used to be a Dell customer...

haven't bought a Dell since the Athlon came out. Guess they don't miss me, but then again I don't really miss them either and prefer AMD-based machines...

No demand?

When Inquirer ran a similar story about Dell and AMD last week they were swamped with letters telling them the same thing: we'd buy Dell if they only had Athlon64/Opteron.

Where I work we also have a Dell deal, which is a pity because I know from testing that the AMD chips perform better for my workload.

I think Dell just isn't listening enough to their customers.

[newstalk]

Dells hardware is like plain vanilla icrecream

Dell needs to wake up and realize that you cannot sell plain vanilla icecream in a market full of exciting flavors. Their hardware, which was once respected, is becoming ho-hum. AMD has a lot of promising technology out now and planned for the future. Why don't they invest in an architecture that would not only be profitable now, but in the future as well. I am sorry, you may be able to convince home users to buy your PCs with "Intel Inside", but the people who buy your servers are technically savy and are looking for alternative superior products like AMD, especially since they have a lower TCO, and growing Linux support as well as Windows. Microsoft has never worked as close with AMD as they do now. Now is the time. Seize the day.

[rkhalloran]

Dell/Intel co-op deal

Dell doesn't want to impact all that co-op ad funding they get from Intel by letting AMD chips in the door. I expect all the noise they're making about Opteron is Yet Another Game to squeeze their supplier for better prices. At this point Dell is the only pure-Intel PC vendor and I'm sure Intel is willing to throw money their way to keep it so.

[shadowself]

Dell's not really independent

Dell has always done what the duopoly of MS and Intel have said.

A perfect example was when Dell came out with a RAMBUS
memory based system because that was what Intel was pushing.
Intel had a huge windfall to gain if RAMBUS became the new
standard so it was pushing RAMBUS very hard. Dell, being the
true Intel lackey, came out with RAMBUS systems.

Similarly, what percentage of Linux and/or bare systems does
Dell ship? Dell pushes window boxes: laptops, desktops and
servers.

Don't expect anything different from Dell. It may happen, but
Hell might freeze over too.

[Tex Murphy PI]

Think like a business

Franklin,

Dell is in the business of MAKING MONEY. NOT a political or economic statement.

It may shock you to hear this, but the biggest cost of a PC for a manufacturer is SUPPORT.

Windows will dominate for a while because:
1) Most people know how to use it - hence, lower incidence of a tech call.
2) Linux users are more likely to "tweak" the OS and system configurations - raising tech call questions.

Intel will dominitate for a little while because:
1) They disclose all processor/chipset erratas publily.
2) They are willing to recall any defective chips - unlike AMD.

It's not about selling cheaper than the competition, it's also about lowering the cost of support.

[arthurdent3]

Too bad for Dell.

I am a strong Dell supporter but they are slowly loosing me as a supporter. I have asked numerous times about AMD support from them. More so since the new AMD64 chips have been out. I would love to buy a dell but I am now going to build one on my own. Another Dell issue(off topic) I have is their lack of a nub mouse on their new laptops. I will still recomend them to other people but as for me I will have to find another source for my computers.

[Tex Murphy PI]

AMD fans really wouldn't buy Branded PCs

Contrary to the posters here, I actually think Dell has a good point to not branching out with AMD products - YET.

Most of the AMD supporters I know bought AMD because it was generally cheaper. Many others bought AMD to "stick it to Intel." Only a few really got AMD chips because they beleived it was faster than any P4 out in the market.

An AMD gamer wouldn't buy from a mass-manufacturer. They either build it themselves, or buy it from a dedicated gaming company.

An Intel-Hater usually supports the little guy, and hence, usually buy white-boxes anyway.

And lastly, a person who buys PCs that are dirt cheap don't make much $$ for any manufacturer - even Dell.

In the corporate data-center world, I can attest that Up-Time is king. Fortune 500 companies pay a premium for uptime - that's why you have servers with RAID, massive amounts of RAM, multi-homed NICs, and reduntant power-supplies.

Intel's advantage is that their technologies and chips are very well proven, and tested against. AMD's track record for disclosing defects is abyssmal. Applications tested against their chips tend to be less than that of an Intel chip.

These are SOME of the factors an IT department takes into account when they buy servers. The Chip inside it matters - just as much as RAID, etc. etc. etc.

So, if an IT guy buys AMD servers and it works for them - THAT'S GREAT! But many other companies are not going to nickel-and-dime on the Processor when the few extra bucks buys them an added insurance for uptime.

[lingsun]

Compaq and HP sell a lot of Athlon processors too.

Compaq and HP sell a lot of computers with Athlon processors too. I tend to buy computers every six months and sell teh old one on eBay. The last computer I had with an Intel processor was a 700mhz Emachine. Except for one white box that had a cheap case and a CPU fan that sounded like a leaf-blower, all my computers have been HPs or Compaqs with Athlon processors.

[lingsun]

Dell could sell more computers if they made AMD processors available.

Dell could be increasing their sales but they're not interested. That's stupid. I might be interested in an overpriced Dell machine and paying overpriced shipping if I didn't have to buy the overpriced Intel processor that comes with it. If I could get an AMD 3200+ processor instead of the Intel equivalent and save at least $100 I might be interested. I get the idea that Dell sells mostly to people who aren't very price sensitive. I would never buy from Dell as long as I can buy a Compaq with an Athlon processor at Best Buy.