- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 13,438
Ok, so it's a bug... which is all you needed to say in the first place, which you also stated above, but then eluded to some other mystery that I seemingly needed to figure out for myself... :/Seriously? Bugs... are bugs and often times they are not known until its too late. Equating that to QC is redonkulous. If we equate cpu bugs to QC issues, then where does that leave Intel and the rest of the industry? No one should release anything until its proven perfect? Bugs happen, just like shit happens. They will do what they can to fix or work around the issue just like Intel does. And the reason he's spinning circles is because he is choosing to ignore the fact that bugs happen, regardless of QC.
That's fine, it's a bug, I can roll with that.
Again though, from an industry/corporate/market/business standpoint, while in reality it is just a bug, it appears to those groups as poor quality control at the surface-level, even though you are correct, as it is just a bug.
From those groups' perspectives, though, bugs = poor quality control, which can not only hurt market share, but also hurt other areas of AMD's product lines by perceived lack of quality control.
Let me restate this: I agree with what you are saying, that it is just a bug and that shit happens - I don't expect anyone or anything to be perfect.
At the surface-level, though, from a business-standpoint, that bug will be perceived as poor quality control of said products - this is literally all I was trying to get at.