Sounds like a Windows issue based on other people in the thread. I'm on Firefox with the same issue. Removing Latin-modern from the CSS file made it much more readable for me.
I haven't seen much hatred. As you said they are just subpar in every metric, except maybe idle power consumption. Power consumption under load though is far superior on AMDs x3d.
I guess if you look long enough, you'll always find some hate, for example Userbenchmark hates on all AMD CPUs for years and is very biased.
Their latest review says the AMD CPUs are bad, cause nobody needs that much performance.
I've seen a lot of what I would call hatred. "Intel has failed!" "285k is junk!" and so on. Just a bit more harsh and sensational than I think they should be, as opposed to giving a balanced perspective. Like I said they are not the best at any specific thing, but have better efficiency than before, still beat AMD at certain tasks, good memory controllers, and so on. With the right pricing they would be easy to recommend.
With only two relevant brands of PC microprocessors, "second best" means "worst". Intel might be close to AMD, but rational reasons for choosing them appear to be reduced to socket compatibility with the CPU in someone's relatively recent old PC, which should allow an upgrade with the significant cost reduction of keeping the old motherboard and cooling system.
No, what I mean is, 285k beats the 9800x3d at multiprocessing stuff & productivity tasks, but loses to 9950x. It beats the 9950x at gaming but loses to the 9800x3d. It performs slightly worse than 14900k at gaming and some other tasks, and overall price/perf, but does its job much more efficiently. There's no single alternative thats better in every metric.
Objective reality doesn't allow us to make predictions itself, it is an nonce. Unfortunately we don't have a time reversing machine to run entropy in reverse and see the thermodynamic truth. All we have is models, your consciousness being one of them.
It’s important to note that Boeing has indeed received substantial subsidies and tax breaks over the years, comparable to or even exceeding those provided to Airbus by the EU. For instance, Washington state alone has granted Boeing tax breaks worth about $9 billion. Additionally, the World Trade Organization (WTO) has ruled that both the EU’s support for Airbus and the US’s benefits to Boeing violated trade rules, leading to tariffs on both sides.
So, while the EU has certainly supported Airbus, the US government has also heavily subsidized Boeing, creating a complex and competitive landscape in the aerospace industry. This context is crucial when discussing the challenges and decisions faced by both companies.
> So, while the EU has certainly supported Airbus, the US government has also heavily subsidized Boeing, creating a complex and competitive landscape in the aerospace industry. This context is crucial when discussing the challenges and decisions faced by both companies.
LLM-generated comment is becoming quite obvious to spot.
On the main topic: Boeing not only received subsidies from the government as stated on the two parent-sibling comments as they've also attempted to kill Bombardier CSeries competition by judicial means in the USA. Instead of providing a better product they attempted to delay Bombardier's sales of the CSeries by starting a long judicial process accusing Bombardier of price-dumping when they didn't have a competitive product.
Unfortunately for Bombardier it was a big blow to their sales of the CSeries, fortunate was Airbus who could pick up the pieces and start production of the jets in the USA to circumvent the main argument Boeing tried to use against them.
> The original sin of the Max disasters was rushing to make the 50+ year-old 737 something it wasn't meant to be to counter Airbus's success in the narrow body segment.
Completely due to mismanagement of Boeing's product line, they lost against Airbus A320neo/A321 and Bombardier CSeries, they weren't competitive and didn't have a product in the works to compete. Against Bombardier they tried their dirty tricks, and failed.
It's all on Boeing, they rushed a subpar product in a panic because of their own failures to read the market, in the process killing hundreds of people.
The Washington state tax package was to coerce Boeing to stay. To which to ate it and proceeded to move its HQ to Chicago and migrate manufacturing to North Carolina. WA state != US gov. Contrast Microsoft to Boeing. Taxpayers dob’t have to feed Microsoft to get them to work on public works. They are self-motivated to improve their environment, which in turns improves the quality of life for their workers and the residents.
ChatGPT says it was only 5.7 billion in tax breaks. And it doesn’t seem to think it gets subsidies outside of that really, however it does of course get massive bloated US contracts. Airbus has had $22 billion in subsidies
