Marketing works on the principle that those jerks share, if not the same zip code, at least the same corporate culture as engineering. And the turnaround between when they observed the situation, when they made a decision and when we got to see the effects of that decision is several years shorter than engineering. So, yeah, I stand by what I say, and, hell, I'll add: I do not own stocks in any electronics hardware company, but I feel that shareholders should examine the performance of Intel in this case and see it as a predictor of where the company will be in four years.
In any case, if their marketing guy is a such a rube as to be roped in by this, is it absurd to imagine that their 2018 CPU will be powered by an E-Cat?
Alright, to finish things off, here's what someone who actually paid his dues, going out in a blaze of glory for pointing out Games Journalist Corruption, has
to say.
I know, nobody's reading this. Well, hopefully someone at Intel is; and if you are, here's another post by that editor so horribly offensive because of her gurl parts that you publicly sided with a lynch mob. This one is on
ethics, a word, to judge by their recent actions, so unfamiliar to your colleagues, that I wouldn't be surprised if the SEC levied historical fines against your company.