送交者: skipper3 于 2006-4-04, 23:41:59:
回答: 三跳写得不错，我想问一下AMD是怎样存活的 由 元江 于 2006-4-04, 21:34:11:
But I can speculate based on casual observation.
First of all I think they got their strategy right from the begining. The strategy is to be a close follower, the NUMBER TWO. There are tremedous advantages for being number two. For example, being the follower you don't need to invest nearly as much in market development and technologocal innovation, resulting in great cost saving. As far as I heard, the performance of AMD products have been slightly inferior to Intel's for for very long time. sacrifice very little performance in exchange for great cost savings is the right thing to do for market followers.
Second, they are able to capitalize on Intel's mistake: a strained supplier-customer relationship resulted from Intel's over agressiveness. No company will comfortable with single sourcing. PC makers have not been happy of relying on Intel since PC became a commodity. They are almost like Intel's hostages. Such distrust escalated into a number of serious legal problems for Intel after "Intel Inside". Under the circumstance AMD being a viable alternative is a unique value proposition, and here they did everything right: being an alternative but not to boot out Intel.
The last factor I can think of is differentiation. What can a follower differentiate? Nothing but the price. My observation is AMD based PCs and laptops are cheaper than Intel based ones. Since everything else is the same, I can only conclude that AMD is a lot cheaper than Intel.
Of course a follower is just a follower. AMD makes far less profit than Intel. It is not in the same league with Intel and I say AMD has no chance to mactch Intel's status for many years to come. Anyone who thinks some day AMD can beat up the big bully is having wishful thinking. Unless Intel makes serious mistake of course.