Stephen, All -
<Q: But the balance seems to be shifting.
McNamee: Before, it was 100% processing power. That was the story in
mainframes, minicomputers and PCs. You always wanted to upgrade as
rapidly as you could to the next processors, because whatever you had
before was obsolete the day you bought it. Today, Intel is struggling to find something that actually needs a 400-megahertz processor. Video games do. But it's hard to find anything in an office that requires it. >
IMHO, This is a perfect quote and example of how these people miss the big picture and do not understand technology. As long as the standard of living in the US and World remains the same, such that a consumer or business is willing to pay, say $1000, for a PC today, they will be equally willing to pay that amount to purchase their next PC a few years down the road at >500 Mhz, whether they need that power or not. The significant point is that only Intel will be able to supply, in quantity, these types of systems and therefore will continue or expand their market share, revenues and earnings. This is why Intel is racing ahead to create ever faster CPU's. If what I am saying is true, the quicker the processors, the closer they are at hitting the "brick" wall. Only Intel will have the technical and financial resources to profitably climb over this wall, and make it a one horse race once again.
In a nutshell, the majority of people do not purchase on the basis of need but on what they can afford. Evidence of this is right under the analysts noses. Do you think that these rich( I assume ) Wall Street analysts actually need to live in "mansions" out in the suburbs or is it because they can afford to?
SK |
