JB, John, Lee, Trufflette, re: remarks
Thank you all for the kind words. Strokes are good and much appreciated :)
That post was easy to write given all the great things Intel has going. As for the analyst's behavior I can only think of two reasons. First there seems to be confusion between Intel and the commodity semiconductor situation. I think this is a bum wrap for Intel as its future revenue growth is tied to its own end-market initiatives under Intel leadership and control. Intel knows how much and where its products go better than any other IT company and thus can plan its capacity better than anybody. Seems the market likes to forget this and blues sing over-capacity, then ever so often the market notices and runs to buy into Intel. The other thing is that analyst like to do is shake the money tree. Sorta like harvesting walnuts one needs to make action to generate value and commissions. How can an analyst "upgrade" if they don't downgrade just as often?
You ask me about Java. Others like Paul E. have covered it pretty well. Intel is and will remain the Java platform of choice same as for every other programming tool. Someone recently wrote a good article (sorry, can't seem to find it tonight) urging Scott to turn Java over to the standards committee before it goes the way of Apple. This sound like good advice. The alternative is to surrender all to Bill Gates buy a boat and fish.
As for cheap(er) PC's. I'm happy. We forget that the premier "cheap computing" company is --- Intel. Its Intel that gets the credit for displacing both mainframes and minis, along with dumb terminals, SNA terminals, calculators and cash registers, paper and pen. Why? better capability at much lower cost. And suddenly people feel that this is something new? Get real! I remember well that that the original IBM PC was prices under one grand, which made it a hit over Apple Lisa and then even Apple Macintosh. Intel has proven again and again that it can continuously raise Intel content while increasing computing value. This is called leadership. Worked then and is working now.
So I see the low end working for Intel just fine by the same means as it works in the past, by expanding the market. These PC's allow internet access to people who otherwise would be unable to personally access the internet. Two categories: budget minded home users; second and more importantly PCs on everyone's desk,
whether they want it or not. Today PCs are installed with all the knowledge workers. Soon they will be with all the teachers, shopkeepers and plumbers as the internet becomes the primary means for all communication. These people don't want to hassle anything about incompatibility and don't want support service. They don't have time and don't have the energy to fiddle. They pick Intel because it is the reliable brand name in the business and thus the best way to guarantee that the stuff works out of the box.
Communication is interesting in that it seems to have a "reverse demand curve". The more people that access a network then the more essential it is to be on that network. Two years ago I toyed with email and only checked it every week or so. Now I feel I must check email hourly and only visit my physical mail slot every week or so.
So here is the math. Say today there are annual sales of 100 PC's and one server. For Intel this is 80 PCs. Five years at 17% unit growth. That is 220 PCs (195 are Intel) and 50 TV/NC "internet appliances" (10 are Intel); 20 servers (18 are Intel), 1 superserver (Intel) network hardware (30% Intel) and ... Well you get the picture.
Jeff |
