You don't think the prices on the Athlon 64 chips (64 bit processing potential!... if someone comes up with a 64 bit OS or serious apps that use it) are more than competitive with even the fastest P4s?? Really, a few GHz or MHz difference in a CPU won't affect system performance noticeably at all, unless you are benchmarking. Even with the Athlon 64s, I went with the 3000+, which runs at 2.0 GHz, because the 3200+ (never mind the 3400+) the former was substantially cheaper than the latter two and even the benchmarks, at least as I read on some sites like Tom's Hardware or anandtech, are almost the same between the 3000+ and the 3200+ chips.
Despite my agreement with you gentlemen that the underdog here actually deserves support, I'd buy Intel chips if they were worth what they are charging for them. But in practice, they are not. AMD's chips, by comparison, are.
Dogmatix-
I have one of the latest MSI boards, the K8T-Neo FIS2R for the Athlon 64 chip. At least for the AMD CPUs, the MSI board (so far, thank God) is working fine, it's SATA ready, and was really no problem to set up.