
Intel crosses an unacceptable ethical line - webaholic
http://semiaccurate.com/2017/03/27/intel-crosses-unacceptable-ethical-line/
======
cyberpunk
A few missing slides that contained over hyped stats from the marketing
department is crossing an unacceptable ethical boundary?

How do you describe IME and it's implications then? That's the ethical line
the enlightened should be offended by.

Sorry to be harsh, but such a bold headline from a site that no one has heard
of (with a probably accurate name) feels like It was written by a PR droid
whose free beer account just got cut off by Intel.

Also; who gives a crap about low end SSDs? I doubt anyone you know will ever
even see one of these in the wild unless you decide to buy cheap gear for some
kind of statement or other..

~~~
mafuyu
The article isn't loading for me, but SemiAccurate isn't a totally unknown
site. They're a bit like The Register for hardware, with an overblown writing
style, but their analysis is decent.

~~~
redtuesday
The google cache has at least the text:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:B5DWGh4...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:B5DWGh4d4d4J:https://semiaccurate.com/2017/03/27/intel-
crosses-unacceptable-ethical-line/%2Bhttp://semiaccurate.com/2017/03/27/intel-
crosses-unacceptable-ethical-line/&client=firefox-b&hl=de&ct=clnk)

------
tgragnato
This is what happens when the bottom-line requires employees some type of
performance: the technology developed has its merits and is performing, but
the data is "inflated."

The rate of results requested in the today world is very high, so although a
lot of people with a lot of talent are working at Intel, I do not pretend they
are able to do better than this.

Certainly the practice is deplorable. Welcome in the magic bubble of the
"marketing fuss"!

~~~
cyberpunk
Even if their stats were totally accurate, it would have made no difference.
No one is buying 10,000 of these things based solely on what the vendor
reports it can do anyway right? So who cares?

If we were building out a lot of capacity which could use these drives then we
would be delinquent in our capacity to not test these personally anyway.

Vendor benchmarks don't translate to reality? Shock horror. If someone gets
burned because they accepted vendor fud as gospel without doing their own
testing thus ended up with stuff that doesn't work for their application then
that's their fault alone.. Once those people are replaced with those who are
able to do their jobs then this is just a out of court replacement deal and
NDA between legal and vendor like happens all the time anyway.

And besides, no one is buying these anyway.

~~~
tgragnato
I completely agree. The "trust but verify" approach is very balanced and
effective. Absolutely nothing to say!

Yet I am able to pinpoint a lot of people in the SMBs that will simply accept
the data proposed in the demos (and for many reasons, not because of
incompetence).

So yes in my world, but being aware this is not always happening.

~~~
cyberpunk
Well, they can't really even do that... ignoring that SMBs should be buying
storage as appliances instead of building it (it's massively cheaper TCO wise
and in such a case the SSD choice is up to emc or netapp or whoever anyway)
and assuming theyre in the rabbit hole of building out storage themselves,
then youll typically be buying servers from dell or hp or whoever and you bet
they've done this testing for you and you will have zero choice of the SSDs
that come in your big 36 sff 2Us..

If you're in the position to be buying raw drives like this, then you're doing
things above the SMB level and wouldn't be burned by this sort of thing...

At least... I hope..

------
sametmax
Sooo bullshit marketing as usual ? Just new with your relations with intel.

------
beanmunch
Description of the transgression begins in the 7th paragraph.

