But would they have the same incentive to take risks? I hear you -- I want them to do well too, and keep making cool things, but giving them too much help may kill the golden eggs. Or something.
We are (or were) rapidly approaching a point where Intel would be the only PC, laptop, and server processor worth considering. If that happened, their only competition would have been themselves, the remnants of AMD, and start-ups who would be behind by hundreds of billions of dollars of infrastructure.
In that situation, would they be likely to keep developing new processors, making them more efficient and more powerful, investing heavily into R&D, and aggressively pricing their products? Or would they give themselves a bonus, their stockholders dividends, and rest on their laurels while taking in the cash for a product that has become essential to the global economy and really the future of humanity?
Or were you speaking of AMD being the good that is working hard, taking big risks, and laying golden eggs because it is fighting an uphill battle?
If so, consider that risks are risks because they don't always work out. Sometimes they fail. And while that works if you are an angel investor risking a few tens of thousands on dozens of start-ups, where any one success can make up for the loss of all the others, it is not as smart when you have a single company you're risking and success means you just get to keep playing a little longer. And having a handful of processor companies takes more than a few tens of thousands each.
