>Thanks, I just sold all my Intel. IBM has a problem with >their 10,000 rpm drives, which is in production; and >recently released its Shark storage product, without even >fibre
> channel capability, to try to catch up to EMC. Should I >short IBM? I heard this morning that HP was told by >customers that its new Jornada had "only 4096 colors" vs.
> advertised 64K (I think). Rebates or recalls to follow. >Short HWP?
I didnt suggest shorting INTC, this would be foolish.
INTC is nevertheless a good company, but it made errors
the last year.(RMBS, PIII design at the end at 1Ghz)
This a chance for AMD to make more money than before, itïs not more but not less.
IBM has problems in a segment of their business, but INTC
has problems, like delivering not what it promised in itïs core business.
IMO AMD has now more Upside value for the next 6-12 month
from an investment point.
I have no religous believe in any of the 2 companyïs,
it AMD starts to make errors i will dump it at high speed.
> Pentium pro was slower in 16 bit than classic Pentiums. It >was a screaming success and predecessor to Xeon, which >screams more.
The PPRO was not a success, it was in a niche market and the processor was expensive to make(big die,low yields) and reached at 200-400 Mhz the end of itïs road.
> - no copper fab
> None was ever planned by Intel until 0.13.
If it wasnt planned it was an bad decision, like
using RMBS for desktops. The selling volume of RMBS systems
is not good, and INTC is IMO converting to DDRAM in the
near future. RMBS has design problems, which prevent it
from beeing a cheap solution and nothing other matters to the user. Keep it simple and cheap, and it will sell and succeed.
> Goodbye to you. Skrewed?
> Edit, BTW, from your profile, how's your CYRX stock > doing???????????
Thanks for your sarcasm :) i always enjoy such :)
With my CYRX experience i learned a lot (lost not much money , had hood luck).
Ulrich |
