Print 64 comment(s) - last by johnsonx.. on Apr 16 at 5:42 PM

AMD cuts prices on Athlon 64 FX-70-series, X2 6000+ and more

AMD has cut prices on its high-end dual-core desktop processors after the launch of Intel’s quad-core Core 2 Extreme QX6800. AMD also announced its new restructuring plans to compensate for reduced quarterly revenue today. The price cuts affect AMD Athlon 64 X2 for single processor desktops and Athlon 64 FX Quad FX processors.

Quad FX Athlon 64 FX-74 and FX-72 processors prices drop to $799 and $599 from $999 and $799 respectively. AMD sells the Athlon 64 FX-70-series in pairs for its Quad FX enthusiast’s dual processor platform. AMD no longer lists the Athlon 64 FX70, the lowest priced pair of Quad FX processors, in its price list.

AMD Athlon 64 FX
Model Previous Price New Price
$999 $799
$799 $599

The Athlon 64 X2 6000+ that AMD released in February receives a drastic price cut to $241 as well. AMD previously priced the X2 6000+ at $464. Other Athlon 64 X2 processors including the X2 5600+, 5200+, 5000+, 4800+, 4400+, 4000+, 3800+ and 3600+ receive price cuts, too. With the new price cuts, all AMD Athlon 64 X2 processors are now priced under $250.

AMD Athlon 64 X2
Model Previous Price New Price
X2 6000+
$464 $241
X2 5600+
$326 $188
X2 5200+
$232 $178
X2 5000+
$222 $167
X2 4800+
$217 $136
X2 4400+
$170 $121
X2 4000+
$144 $104
X2 3800+
$113 $83
X2 3600+
$102 $73

Intel expects to cut prices on Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad processors later this quarter as well. Intel also plans to aggressively cut prices of its entire processor lineup in Q3’07 before AMD launches Barcelona and refresh its Core 2 Duo product lineup.

Expect retailer pricing to reflect AMD’s new pricing structure in the upcoming weeks. AMD’s pricing is per processor, in 1,000-unit quantities.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

high end?
By adam92682 on 4/10/07, Rating: 0
RE: high end?
By feelingshorter on 4/10/2007 1:08:57 AM , Rating: 4
Well, with all the hype about Intel Core 2 Duo, I believe we are overlooking one factor with AMD cpus. They idle at lower watt usage. So for someone who wants to make a silent PC, this is great. Or for those of us that are less than frequent gamers. I'm just excited about C2D as you are, but there are still people who buy AMD for the above mentioned reasons.

RE: high end?
By ionoxx on 4/10/2007 1:29:19 AM , Rating: 5
I've built quite a few AMD machines lately, using AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ 65W, Asus M2NBP-VM/CSM motherboards, 1 GB of OCZ ram, 160GB Seagate 7200.9, NEC AD-7170A, Antec NSK6500 + 2 extra 92mm fans,and a Floppy/Card Reader Combo.

Using a kill-a-watt, these computers idle at 54 Watts with cool 'n' quiet enabled. Full load 95 Watts. I think its fair to say, these are very efficient computers. People need to realise that for general purpose machines, AMD still offers a better product. Energy conservation is as important with computers as it is with cars.

RE: high end?
By irev210 on 4/10/07, Rating: 0
RE: high end?
By Hoser McMoose on 4/10/2007 2:36:50 PM , Rating: 2
It's interesting that despite how close they are in apparent costs, when I tried to price out a system the Intel solution was going to cost a LOT more. I was actually planning on getting a Core 2 Duo setup until I found out I couldn't fit it into my (admittedly slim) budget without making major sacrifices.

Setups I was looking at (all prices in Canadian $):

AMD Athlon64 X2 4400+ : $190
2GB DDR2-800 memory : $165
Asus M2NPV-VM : $100

Total: $455, $482 after tax


Intel Core 2 Duo 4300 : $210
2GB DDR2-800 memory : $165
Gigabyte GA-965GM-S2: $145
SATA to PATA adapter: $15 *

Total: $535, $567 after tax

(* needed because I have two PATA optical drives and one PATA hard drive, but all low-cost Intel boards can only handle 2 PATA drives).

End result was that the AMD system worked out to $85 cheaper. In fact the X2 4600+ was still cheaper than the E4300 while the X2 4800+ was about price parity. The problem really was the motherboards. I just couldn't get a cheap board for the Intel solution (the Asus board you mentioned wasn't available while other 945GZ boards were badly lacking compared to the GeForce 6150 board I did end up with while still being more expensive).

RE: high end?
By subhajit on 4/10/2007 2:37:15 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. As far as overall platform is concerned AMD still provides much better solutions for Mid Range (with integrated graphics). Like the ASUS M2NPV-VM board which has a DVI port so you can use a wide screen lcd with brilliant image quality.

RE: high end?
By Tsuwamono on 4/10/2007 12:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
personally i still choose AMD over Intel dispite intels ability to finish superPi calculations faster then AMD. For me there are just a few things that bug me about intel that just wont let me hop on that bandwagon. I almost did when i built a C2D rig for my friend but call me crazy but i dont really like the motherboards available for intel and i extremely dislike the heat sink mounting on the C2Ds. 4 holes? come on intel you couldnt give us something other then that?

I dunno, i know they are faster processors in the high end and some may argue in the lower ends aswell but unless im building a PC just to do SuperPi or Folding i dont see a reason for taking what i consider disadvantages for its slightly faster speeds.

Intel Fanboys: "Slightly faster speeds" is in context, im a gamer and gaming is mostly GPU based which makes the CPU in it barely a factor. Also note i did not dispute intel's control of the over all speed crown. No need to flame i already pointed out all your arguements..

AMD fanboys: Dont take my comments off and say that AMD is the 1337 WTFPWNZORs or whatever. its not, its just a better solution depending on ones personal needs.

RE: high end?
By Samus on 4/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: high end?
By NotAok on 4/10/2007 9:32:40 AM , Rating: 2
less than frequent gamers? AMD is the reason I am a pc gamer. They offer the most bang for your buck when compared to Intel. I'm still using an AMD 3400, which i paid little for, and can still run the latest games with ease.

Right now I'm playing stalker with everything almost maxed out and it runs fine... Granted my 2 gigs of ram and 7900gtx plays a big part in that but still, those are all cheap parts too.

AMD has always been the best buy when it comes to gaming. Top of the line hardware is almost never needed and ends up being a waste of money in the long run.

RE: high end?
By Pirks on 4/10/2007 5:44:06 PM , Rating: 1
Right now I'm playing stalker with everything almost maxed out and it runs fine
Exactly. Stalker is the reason I'm switching to S939, this is da best bang for the buck, Intel fanboys can continue licking fat blue Intel's a$$, no problem with that - as long as Intel keeps away from producing EFFICIENT and FAST _single_ core CPUs with DDR support (not DDR2, who needs this laggy thing for fast paced 3D gaming like Stalker?) - I'm staying with S939. The second there is an interesting dual-core-friendly game on horizon (no, not SupCom, not my type, thanks :), like Crysis - I'm swapping my SanDiego with X2 3800 and continue kicking Intel idiots' puny little a$$es in the "bang for a buck" department :P That's all true only for 3D gaming of course. Video encoding experts don't need to apply.

RE: high end?
By majormajormajormajor on 4/10/2007 10:17:45 AM , Rating: 2
Are you sure about the low idle watt usage? I'm a bit concerned after looking at this article:
But of course there is a disclaimer here - saying that the different testbeds used would be a distorting factor in the comparison...

Can anybody point me to reliable stats on the minimum idling wattage of a high end Athlon X2 processor - say the 5000+ Brisbane?

RE: high end?
By Hoser McMoose on 4/10/2007 2:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
Different test beds indeed! The original poster was using integrated graphics (probably about 5W idle, 15W at load?) while the article you quoted is using a GeForce 8800GTX (probably about 100W idle, 150W at load).

Changing the highest power consuming device in the PC is going to make a HUGE difference!

RE: high end?
By majormajormajormajor on 4/10/2007 11:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
'tis integrated graphics for me then! I don't game, and am not likely to load vista either.

Thanks for the wattage numbers. I just read another anandtech article which showed that the X2 5000+ Brisbane was very good on the power consumption front.

RE: high end?
By JumpingJack on 4/10/2007 3:22:14 AM , Rating: 2
Ohhhh, come on --- AMD launched the X2 line in May of 2005 as I recall, and it was this launch that really widened the gap between similar Intel offerings. They charged a premium for them (remember when an X2 4800+ was 600 bucks), and rightly so as they were high end at the time....

RE: high end?
By Sureshot324 on 4/10/2007 3:25:08 AM , Rating: 3
Those are some MASSIVE price cuts. AMD's sales must have been seriously hurting for them to go that far.

RE: high end?
By mino on 4/10/2007 3:43:35 AM , Rating: 2
No, the real reason are Intel's price cuts due out in a few weeks.
Also some higher-end pieces have had bad price/perf. compared to C2D. Therefore what this actually means is that AMD is pretty confident on the manufacturing part up to 3GHz...
(these 3GHz parts were nowhere-to-be-seen not too long ago)

RE: high end?
By Pirks on 4/10/2007 5:36:19 PM , Rating: 1
I didnt know AMD makes high end cpus
And I "didnt know" adam92682 is is an Intel fanboy

By shabby on 4/9/2007 10:30:55 PM , Rating: 5
I wish the gpu sector had these kind of price cut wars...
Before 8800GTX - $599
Now 8800GTX - $399

RE: ...
By xsilver on 4/10/2007 12:00:59 AM , Rating: 5
lol - but instead you have:
Before 8800GTX - $599
Now 8800GTGTOKOXT pro edition - $399 (actually just a rebadged 8600)

/end sarcasm

RE: ...
By crimson117 on 4/10/2007 11:21:31 AM , Rating: 2
lol actually your post wasn't so sarcastic, it was fairly accurate :)

RE: ...
By jtesoro on 4/10/2007 8:02:16 AM , Rating: 2
What we need is NVIDIA's competition to be present at the highest end. Come on AMD, set a date already! All we've got right now is Q2 2007, and that's too ambiguous.

They don't have to significantly beat the G80 with R600 (well, maybe they do considering how late it is), but they gotta show up for the fight at least.

RE: ...
By RamarC on 4/10/2007 9:52:53 AM , Rating: 2
I wish the gpu sector had these kind of price cut wars...

there's a big difference since intel and amd sell their chips directly and nvidia and ati don't. so a gpu price drop has a muted effect since you still have the video card components and manufacturing costs in the final price tag.

now if we had user-upgradeable video cards with socket based GPUs, then gpu price wars would get really interesting.

RE: ...
By PrezWeezy on 4/10/2007 2:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
now if we had user-upgradeable video cards with socket based GPUs, then gpu price wars would get really interesting.

I don't even want to think about the headache that would cause...
Do you know how many end customers would be buying CPU's and trying to make them fit in the GPU socket?

RE: ...
By AMDZen on 4/11/2007 11:05:46 AM , Rating: 2
Who cares how many people do that? How many people buy Intel C2D's and try and put them in an AM2 board? I don't know, but they're pretty dumb computer builders.

The enthusiests that build their own will be able to figure it out. And the people who buy dell are still going to buy dell. I can't believe you would make such an ignorant comment, as if stupid people are reasons not to evolve. Maybe we shouldn't have Blu-Ray since people will be buying Blu-Ray movies and trying to play them in their DVD player. They're the same size afterall.

Ignorance is no excuse, and that goes for you too.

RE: ...
By kmiller1700 on 4/13/2007 1:03:09 PM , Rating: 2
Ignorance is no excuse, and that goes for you too.

and it goes to you too..

That's all very good
By DocDraken on 4/10/2007 12:07:07 PM , Rating: 3
but I'm majorly pissed off that AMD chose not to continue supporting S939 even though there is very little performance benefit of DDR II and the AM2 platform over S939...

RE: That's all very good
By NARC4457 on 4/10/2007 1:54:47 PM , Rating: 2
Man, me too. My S939 was ridiculously short lived. I'm still on it, and it's running great (just a 3500+) but I would love to get my hands on a dual core for a reasonable price.

That would keep me from having to upgrade to a C2D in the somewhat near future.

RE: That's all very good
By Pirks on 4/10/2007 5:30:31 PM , Rating: 1
What's the problem with getting decent S939 dualcore? There are zillions of them on the market, why'd you go to Intel from S939? I see no reason unless you are self-employed and can get extra $$$ from your CPU being faster (you do video/encoding/computational stuff like that), and this is not true for 99% of the AT/DT readers (99% is my wild guess, correct me if I'm wrong)

RE: That's all very good
By DocDraken on 4/11/2007 1:43:42 AM , Rating: 2
I do have a dual core, a 4600+. But my only option of upgrading from that, without having to get a new motherboard and RAM, is getting the Opteron 185 and overclocking it.

RE: That's all very good
By johnsonx on 4/11/2007 2:17:18 AM , Rating: 2
S939 dual cores are only $100 these days. Sure, it's not quite as cheap as an AM2 dual core, but you get to keep your mobo, RAM and windows install. What's to complain about?

RE: That's all very good
By DocDraken on 4/11/2007 3:03:37 AM , Rating: 2
What's to complain about? That you can't get faster than 4600+ or Opteron 185 on S939....

RE: That's all very good
By Pirks on 4/11/2007 3:00:56 PM , Rating: 1
you can't get faster than 4600+ or Opteron 185 on S939
funny piece of bs :)) here ya go:

See draken how easy it is :)) learn to use search engines, and learn inet shopping skills in general, they make you think total different and speaking much less bs than you do now :)

RE: That's all very good
By InsaneScientist on 4/12/2007 3:33:26 PM , Rating: 2
you can't get faster than 4600+ or Opteron 185 on S939

funny piece of bs :)) here ya go:

Funny piece of bs :)

The X2 4800+ runs at the exact same clockspeed as the X2 4600+ (2.4Ghz), the only difference is that the 4600 has 512Kb of L2 and the 4800+ has 1Mb of L2 - not enough to make much of a measurable difference, let alone a significant or noticable one.

For all intents and purposes, you cannot go any faster than a 4600+ on S939, because a 4800+ isn't any faster.

RE: That's all very good
By Pirks on 4/12/2007 3:44:00 PM , Rating: 1
4800+ isn't any faster
Adding extra meg of cache doesn't make chip any faster. Thanks man, you made my day :)

RE: That's all very good
By johnsonx on 4/13/2007 3:02:35 PM , Rating: 2
Extra cache doesn't make a chip faster. All it does is help it not be slower; you need a certain amount to mask the slowness of main memory access and any additional is just wasted silicon. 90% of benchmarks show that 512k per core is plenty for the current AMD K8 architecture, so an extra meg of cache doesn't make a 4800+ faster than a 4600+ by any significant amount.

This does of course beg the question as to why AMD increased the Brisbane's cache latency in preparation for adding more cache later on. A Brisbane is a touch slower than an equal-cached Manchester, yet all past benchmarks show that save for a few apps, extra cache doesn't help much. So AMD slightly crippled today's Brisbane performance for what? Did they do some internal testing and discover that a REALLY big cache magically helps K8 where a 1Mb cache doesn't? But of course they can't afford the die space for more cache now, or ever for that matter given the way Intel is bludgeoning them with the Core-2 now and Penryn later. It's a mystery.

RE: That's all very good
By johnsonx on 4/16/2007 5:42:17 PM , Rating: 2
If anyone cares, probably not, I meant Windsor rather than Manchester. That is, I was meaning to compare Brisbane on AM2 to Windsor on AM2, not to Manchester on 939.

RE: That's all very good
By DocDraken on 4/14/2007 2:58:52 AM , Rating: 2
And maybe you should learn more about how processors work before spouting off nonsense.

First of all, an Opteron 185 is faster than a s939 4800+, so like I said, you can't get faster than that for the S939.

Second of all, the 4800+ is not really faster than a s939 4600+. If there is a difference it's so miniscule it would be stupid to spend money on "upgrading" to a 4800+ from a 4600+.

The s939 4800+ is not even available in retail here in Europe. Besides like stated above, the point is moot since the 4800+ won't provide any real difference in performance over the 4600+ anyway.

You were saying something about "inet shopping skills" and "BS"?

me wants!
By johnsonx on 4/9/2007 10:14:25 PM , Rating: 4
Other Athlon 64 X2 processors including the X2 5600+, 5200+, 5000+, 4800+, 4400+, 4000+, 3800+ and 36000 +

What is that, 20Ghz, 1Gb cache? Me wants!

RE: me wants!
By FITCamaro on 4/9/2007 10:29:00 PM , Rating: 1
Naw. Its AMDs next next gen processor. 8 cores, 5 IPC, but only 4MB cache(512KB per core). :)

RE: me wants!
By webdawg77 on 4/9/2007 10:33:08 PM , Rating: 3
Nah, if you figure it's 10x a 3600+, then it's more likely to run at 18Ghz and have 20 cores with the above mentioned 512 kB cache per core. Although, you do have to wonder about the TPD ;).

RE: me wants!
By johnsonx on 4/11/2007 2:25:59 AM , Rating: 2
ok, this is rather silly since we're just talking about a typo that's been long corrected.... but, here goes:

If you multiply the clock speed AND the number of cores by 10, then you'd get a theoretical 100x boost in performance, so the model number would be 360000+. In my original joke-guess about the 36000+, I boosted the cache by 10x because it would have to be much bigger to feed the 10x faster clock speed of the 2 cores. Extra cache doesn't make a processor faster, it only helps it not be slower.

about damn time!
By matthewpapa on 4/9/2007 10:37:42 PM , Rating: 2
about damn time!
They put this off too long.

RE: about damn time!
By just4U on 4/10/2007 3:21:05 AM , Rating: 4
I see nothing wrong for most people to buy amd right now. I own a core2 6600/8800GTS/2G system and a X2 3800+/7900GS/1G system. While I definitely do prefer the core2 ... popping back on to the much more modest amd solution is no chore at all. I don't sit back and go omg ... its soooooo slow because in all actuality it's NOT.

Here in Canada I can build a 4600+ based system with similar features to the 4300 for approximately 100.00 less (mb/cpu) Now provided your not going to overclock (and 99% of those who use computers do not, which system has more bang?) I'd say the amd atleast in the lower mid range.

I like this pricing, it makes amd a viable option right now.. and even at a 40% reduction.. the 4300 (here anyway) will still be priced in the same range as the 4600.. which it does NOT beat at stock speeds.

RE: about damn time!
By Darith on 4/10/2007 10:39:18 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, I would have considered AMD since the existence of the Core 2 Duo back in November, but the price was not agreeable based on performance. Now I won't even consider AMD (though I use to be a big AMD fan) when I'm searching for a processor. Though I think a bit of passing time for better deals will occur before I consider AMD again. We've still got our eye on you AMD!

By yacoub on 4/10/2007 8:23:53 AM , Rating: 2
Expect retailer pricing to reflect AMD’s new pricing structure in the upcoming weeks.

Be ready for this same tactic by e-tailers in two weeks when Intel's prices drop - the retailers won't drop their prices right away because they still have inventory they purchased at a higher cost.

Just a heads-up for folks who are all excited to open their wallets on April 22nd expecting immediate gratification in pricing. Have patience if it takes a few days to a couple weeks before e-tailers start playing ball and bring the prices down to the new prices.

RE: Warning!
By sathishcj on 4/10/2007 12:15:57 PM , Rating: 2
Checkup up the prices on newegg - they have already dropped - (Athlon X2 6000)

It seems quite attractive to me.

RE: Warning!
By yacoub on 4/10/2007 12:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, that's great news! Glad to see not all e-tailers will be playing the markup game.

RE: Warning!
By Chernobyl68 on 4/10/2007 2:00:29 PM , Rating: 2
that 5600+ is looking pretty nice...!

Quick Check
By Kougar on 4/10/2007 3:13:54 AM , Rating: 3
Intel also plans to aggressively cut prices of its entire processor lineup in Q3’07 before AMD launches Barcelona and refresh its Core 2 Duo product lineup.

Is this reported/confirmed that Intel plans their Q3 slashing to occur before Barcelona? This would make it a very specific timeframe if so.

You can thank me later...
By Hoser McMoose on 4/10/2007 1:55:42 PM , Rating: 2
It's true, I caused this price drop. Not on purpose, but it was all me... honest! I just picked up an Athlon64 X2 a few weeks back, so naturally the price would have to fall by 30% right afterwards!


:) Ok, I'm done!

By crystal clear on 4/10/07, Rating: -1
By Zandros on 4/10/2007 9:35:18 AM , Rating: 5
Actually, no he did not. He commented on your writing style, which is very in your face, just like the style of several spam mails. I don't think he commented on the validity of your facts at all.

It would look much better if you didn't insert unnecessary line breaks and exclamation marks all over the place. Combined with the abundance of capital letters, it really feels like the internet equivalent of someone jumping in front of you on a street and beginning to scream a lot of incoherent stuff.

Try to use the bold, italic and underline tags for emphasis instead, it will look much less hectic. Oh, and no space before punctuation characters. It's also advisable to avoid using ampersands in situations like this, and what on earth is up with the "quote-" and "unquote-"? There are perfectly good quotation marks to use.

By TomZ on 4/10/07, Rating: -1
By yacoub on 4/10/2007 12:22:42 PM , Rating: 4
Don't be so ridiculous. It has nothing to do with being a native English speaker and everything to do with writing like an adult and with even a modicum of consideration for those who will be reading what one is writing.

By TomZ on 4/10/2007 1:09:43 PM , Rating: 1
It's ironic you used the word "adult," since I almost said in my post that most adults look past the form and read the content. But I didn't want to sound patronizing.

Anyway, I communicate a lots of folks on a daily basis, by e-mail, phone, and through meetings. If I held their grammar, punctuation, diction, etc. against them, then I wouldn't have anybody left to work with. In the real world, we focus on what someone is saying. While I agree that crystal clear's style may be a bit out there, I don't see what the purpose is of making such a big deal about it. You failed to address that point in your reply. After all, we're not paid, professional writers, and I also don't think that he/she is being intentionally inconsiderate.

By crystal clear on 4/11/2007 2:58:09 AM , Rating: 1
1)Yes, you are right in saying that I (He)am not being intentionally inconsiderate.Never did & nor intend to be one.

2)I am not a journalist that I have to bother about the
quality/level of my english & my composition/presentation
of my text.As long as I convey my message clearly is enough for me & ofcourse understood.

3) In my business "Quality of contents" is more important than all that quality english & presentation.
Example-We focus on what you can offer rather than focus on the english/grammar/pronounciations etc that is used to make
that offer.

4)BBC(tech) website has a very high standard of english,but
when it comes to quality of contents its far behind DailyTech.Who cares about the english/grammar etc I want
the "contents".What are tech website for ? -to provide the
hard core technical stuff & not for socializing.

5)You TOMZ are not patronizing nor do you sound like-
you just write what you think is right.(in any comment)
Thats why you get my full respect-just for your honesty &
simple down to earth attitudes.

6)You say "I don't see what the purpose is of making such a big deal about it"-my response to this is that"they dont have a educated response,so they grab the irrelevant stuff
to hit on.JUST to make a comment sometimes with those silly
one liners,or if they lack one simply rate you down.

By crystal clear on 4/11/2007 3:43:09 AM , Rating: 2
"everything to do with writing like an adult"

I send it staight to the "recyle bin"- Gone

By slacker57 on 4/10/2007 12:53:59 PM , Rating: 4
While I generally agree with you, I think it's very easy to tell if someone has a poor writing style based on not being a native speaker, and it's pretty evident that's not what the problem is here. If you take out the strange punctuation and CAPS, it would come across with much more success. The way you write things really is as important as what you are trying to say, just like in speaking. Yelling at people is only going to result in them becoming angry with you, it's not going to make them more receptive to your points.

Lippman: And, anyway I was just reading your final edit, um, there seems to be an inordinate number of exclamation points.
Elaine: Well, I felt that the writing lacked certain emotion and intensity.
Lippman: Oh, "It was damp and chilly afternoon, so I decided to put on my sweatshirt!"
Elaine: Right, well...
Lippman: You put exclamation point after sweatshirt?
Elaine: That's that's correct, I-I felt that the character doesn't like to be ch-ch-chilly...
Lippman: I see, "I pulled the lever on the machine, but the Clark bar didn't come out!" Exclamation point?
Elaine: Well, yeah, you know how frustrating that can be when you keep putting quarters and quarters in to machine and then *prrt* nothing comes out...
Lippman: Get rid of the exclamation points.
I hate exclamation points.

By Zandros on 4/10/2007 10:14:16 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, that was really not the main intention.

What I meant to do with my post was to explain what the poster on the other topic really said, and why he would say such a thing. A little bit of advice on how to avoiding this reception was thrown in as a nice gesture, because no one dislikes some constructive criticism, right?

By crystal clear on 4/11/07, Rating: 0
By crystal clear on 4/11/2007 4:28:27 AM , Rating: 1
"I don't really understand the point of criticizing a person's writing style"

They do that when they lack an Educated response.

"or even rating someone down because you don't like their writing style."

Thats what I call Blatant ABUSE of the rating system.

"In addition, I think we need to consider that not everyone here is a native and/or experienced English speaker/writer"

Any experienced business traveller will tell you that &
A WISE PERSON LIKE YOU.They lack your wisdom.

By crystal clear on 4/11/2007 3:35:20 AM , Rating: 2
I do appreciate constructive criticism,I see good things in

I make no attempt to defend myself but wish to state the facts-

1)I am not those 9 to 5 types glued to their desk & keyboard
in some IT dept or office cubes.
I could be anywhere at the time I post my comment via my laptop-at the airport,my hotel lobby,restaurant,conference etc.All very crowded noisy surroundings sitting with my laptop on my lap.Certainly not an ideal conditions/situation
& compared to the comfort of some guy in an IT dept or office.
Under such conditions its not so easy to send out a quality
presentation(comment) that you guys can do sitting at your desk.

If & when I need to give a polished presentations,I have my secretary to do just that-give her the contents thats all.

Anyway thanks.

By crystal clear on 4/11/07, Rating: 0
By crystal clear on 4/11/07, Rating: 0
"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki