on the bottome image, you can see where the post-photo image editing has bled onto the wrap around apron (right side of "butt" image, along apron seem.

OMG. I own several Athlon products. They have been good chips, but what could compell a company to declare an untested process due Q4 2003 as "processor of the year" in 2002? And what kind of company would want to put up such an award over a non-existant product.

It's really sad to see a company that could once simple stand on it's merits ("we have a fase, inexpensive chip") reduced to "reinventing" it's ratings system over and over to declare existing processors faster, and having to find obscure people to award "processor of the year" 2 years in advance.

I'm reminded (sadly) of when Motorolla was puttin gout performace charts against Intel. They would put an existing Intel chip on a chart with their projections for the next 24 months. Shock and suprice, their projections for next years PPC chip would out perform the actual numbers for this years Intel chip.

That's just pathetic

Am I the only one miffed when the news can't keep basic ideas straight? Kids with improved thumb dextairity gained through useage are not mutations. To be a mutation, it would have to be a genetic change which would then be passed to future generations. This is just like how gymnists have better balance, and surgeons better manual dextairty... training.