To break up the redundant lithany of Intel vs AMD threads, I'm going to start a new discussion. Intel vs Microsoft. Which company has made more contributions to the computer era? While both have been the cornerstone of computers everywhere, I think Intel has been more innovative in driving computing forward. Microsoft for the most part plays copycat to Apple.

Unless Microsoft suddenly started making CPUs, put this in another forum.

Well, for consumers more contributed IBM and Apple (first PCs) and Microsoft (brought PCs for the masses on the shoulders of IBM). Intel is major driving force in cpu market today, but it may as well have been AMD, IBM, whatever. Intel havent contributed major way in any inovation which lead to massive adoption of PC. You can view Intel as Texas (TI), HP, etc.

Not true. Intel introduced the 4004 and then went on to invent the x86 platform which was the cornerstone of personal computers. Every other CPU manufacturer followed Intel's lead and even Bill Gates based his MS Dos and later Windows platform on Intel's chips, writting the code especially for those processors. Your argument that if it wasn't Intel it would be somebody else could be said for any company, the fact of the matter remains though that Intel formed the basis of the PC as we know it today. So yes, I will go for Intel on this one. Heck, even Macs run on Intel platform nowadays!

Intel, no question about it.

They designed the worlds first microprocessor, pioneered x86, the first of the Pentium line where one of the most revaltionary CPUs of their time, without Intel AMD would probably just be a distant memory by now since their partnership led to AMD designing their own processors. Without Intel computers would probably still take up entire rooms, and Big Blue would be the leading computer entity. All Microsoft has done is snatched the computing crown from Apple with Windows. And they couldnt have done that if Intel hadnt designed the 4004, cant have software without hardware.

Well Miscrosoft's goal from it's beginins was "A computer in every home on every house" (that's a semi quote as i don't remeber exacltly Bill's words).

Intel din't made the PC, they didn't even poject pe 4004 for use inside a PC and was never used for that either, they simply made a 'general purpose cpu'.

8080 was a powerful enough cpu to use inside a PC and IBM and Microsoft used it to make the PC ideea a reality.

If anyone should take credit for the PC ideea that's IBM and Microsoft and by Microsoft I mean Bill Gathes, he's the one that pushed the PC ideea forward.
from wiki:

Get you facts straith, 4004 was not unique there were other similar cpu's back then and x86 wasn't originaly invented by intel, it's an extension to the 8008 instruction set originaly invented by CTC.

Inte's wasn't the only chip producing company and if you think without Intel computers would still ocupy entire rooms you need to read up on computer history because you are way off.

Microsoft's products wouldn't do anybody any good without the advancements in hardware from Intel and AMD.
They would just simply be too slow for any hardware to run them.

Not quite! Any software company leverages what the hardware can offer and make the appropriate software product.

Btw, if Intel and AMD are so indispensable and all the recognitions seems to go their way why do other architectures exit like PowerPC or Sparc? Do you thing PC's could not be build using those CPU's? Think again! (and they could potentially be faster for some taks using CPU with a RISC architecture too)

Intel makes CPU's ^^^

Intel. But I think that if you asked people what is the first thing that comes to mind when they think of computers, most would say Microsoft.

Not quite! Any software company leverages what the hardware can offer and make the appropriate software product.

Btw, if Intel and AMD are so indispensable and all the recognitions seems to go their way why do other architectures exit like PowerPC or Sparc? Do you thing PC's could not be build using those CPU's? Think again! (and they could potentially be faster for some taks using CPU with a RISC architecture too)

Nah, we would just use powerful C2Ds on Macs instead of PCs (even though I like MS, I think that Intel has contributed much more).

PS: By the way, you wouldn't happen to be a programmer, would you? Cause you are very much pro software I reckon...

VIA FTW!!!

How can Microsoft and Intel ever be compared because ones an operating and the other is a Microprocessor :? As far as Computing contributions go surely they have done their share because they focus on too completely different sections of Computing.
Microsoft have dominated the operating System's market while leaving its main competitor the Mac trailing way behind. I don't wish to anger Mac users, but the simple fact is Microsoft has been more successful. For all of MS Windows faults it gives me what I want decent software compatibility. A company that has become a huge player in Computing and the richest company in the world (last I read) really deserves merit I believe.

Here is the way I see it.
Sure Intel wasn't the first processor. Over the years, Intel has developed new processors that did things that have never been done before. New mirco arcs and such like SSE and other ideas.

I don't think Microsoft did the same thing. They never were first with their major products. All of the major products they make were developed by other people first.
Look at their list:
DOS - they bought the rights from another guy and named it MS-DOS. Heck, MS-dos didn't evene exist when IBM dreamed up the PC. Their first choice for dos fell through. Bill saw an oppertunity and ran with it.
Windows - Apple did it before, and Xerox did it before Apple.
I.E. - Netscape did it before. I forget who did it first.
Office - Lotus, Wordperfect did it before, and others were before them.

Intel has made some inovative processors, Windows doesn't seem to inovate, they seem to wait until someone has a great idea, and then borrow it and make a competing product, then push their compitition out of the leader position.

I think your Microsoft dislike is blinding your vision. You make it sound like Microsoft is a company full of thieves that don't really do anything except buy/steal things others make. Most of their workers are software developers, not lawyers and venture capitalists. I don't think you realize how much software Microsoft creates each year and how many companies and home users use those products. It's pretty amazing, really.

No one makes something from scratch. Everyone gets "ideas" from others. Microsofts products are by and large the most mainstream friendly products - that's why they've gained MSS in their segments. That's their business model. People can argue that Linux is the most secure personal OS, and yet...it has just about 0 market penetration. Why? It's not practical for main consumers. No one besides ultra geeks wants to have to write a driver so that a new camera will work with the system. People like being able to pull just about any app off the shelf and have it work on their computer system.

Microsoft started by trying to provide people with the middle of the road. Other things can be the best in certain aspects, but MS platforms provide all-around good solutions.

And you forgot that SQL Server was "purchased" from Sybase. SQL Server may not be as fast as Oracle (debateable), but it's a whole lot more user friendly.

Oh, and back on topic...

Microsoft has driven software innovation

Intel created the first microprocessor.

Software standardization

Hardware standardization

You can't really give either company the crown for where we are now with computers. It's a combination of them, plus many other companies. Think of the gaming industry...that pushed a lot of innovation IMO.

Explain Vista then.

I think you both Gneisenau and wolverinero79 are right There is no question MS creates loads if codes every year, but still the fact is, B.Gate is better marketer than programer. He sold "OS" for 1 mln. without having anything in the hands, and then bought DOS for 50k just to deliver something. "Borrowed" ideas from every source possible, a lot of times on the edge of legitimacy. Then bullied competition with every means possible as well. Thats why rarely who likes MS. Still the fact remains, Gates delivered first all arround user-friendly software system for customers to work with.