@Nilay

Sarcasm fail. Get off your high horse and lighten up.

I downloaded this software only to find out its useless to me, since you cannot do anything over bluetooth. Why does that matter?

Well, the BlackBerry happens to have a POS usb connector that breaks off.

I'm scraping this bad boy for a 2G iPhone.

You mean no one has tried it because the staff at Engadget only have iPhones, right?

Sexy!

@no: Contractions are beyond him.

(pretty sure that falls somewhere after trollish-fanboy on the education scale)

@ShirkPower

You mean the iPhone

'cause you know.. it does web apps an' stuff..

@Gad Get

No I don't, stifling competition doesn't stifle innovation, not in any real sense; and that is the point I was attempting to get across.

Intel is still 'looking ahead', innovating and developing, and that's all that matters. My point being, they are not stagnant even though they are on top.

I did not bring their business practices into the conversation, as you felt was necessary, I do not. What happened happened, they were penalized. That, however, is not my concern.

--
AMD's situation is their own doing, even while they had a superior product they failed to properly market their product and gain marketshare. Now while your rebuttal will be due to the EU's finding, it does not change the fact. They failed to beat Intel where it mattered, and what's worse is they have fallen behind in the technology they so desperately need to excel in to survive. To make matters worse, AMD's only respite is their 'break free' campaign, which obviously hasn't helped.

With that said, I don't care to get into the semantics of the Intel bad, AMD good argument. Intel produces the technology I want, and continues to push the envelope, AMD has failed to do so. If Intel's shady business tactics have insured their continued evolution, improvement and innovation then so be it; We still benefit.

But, that's just my opinion, I'm more for the advancement than the politics.

Cheers.

It is my understanding, and a quick search of Google, i5 is the desktop variant of i7, which is more focused on workstation and higher end computing.

This could still be seen as a good thing. Intel spent billions on the fabs and development for this as well as the current i7 iteration. By delaying they can recoup more money, which in turn, will go back into development.

No doubt some will simply dismiss that, claiming how Intel is abusing their dominance in the market and will point to this as them being stagnant without competition.

Intel is still hard at work, developing the next generation, and the generation after that.

Just because they are ahead without much competition doesn't mean they gave their engineers vacation time so Intel could sit around, collect money and wait for a rebuttal by AMD.

The only downside is yes, we will not get to see the benefits of Intel's undoubtedly remarkable efforts just yet, but they are still out there and they are still hard at work and soon enough, we will reap what they have sown.

@EI8HT

Apparently he should be fired for not showing up

You [fail] at emphasis.