Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter S. who wrote (13238)	6/14/1999 11:32:00 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16960

>> Is it possible to make money from such egalitarianism? Who said anything about egalitarianism? This is good business sense. There is a contradiction in your first two paragraphs, i.e nVidia et all are not enough licensees and Glide is marketable. IF Glide is really a marketable product (which don't fully agree) then other card makers will pay for it. If it is not, then... The only value of Glide to 3dfx IMO is that it allows them to implement features ahead of D3D. As such, they should throw away their illusions of grandure about Glide becomming a "platform" and be concerned about keeping it alive. Why should the developers implement the games for yet-another-api, when the market for it is limited. On the other hand, if there is a critical mass behind Glide (i.e many card makers supporting it), then such development may be justified. And who knows, may be in time Glide will become a platform and 3dfx will rip the rewards from it. But that will not happen so long as 3dfx is as is. >> Gates vs Jobs Please, I've heard about how Gates crushed Jobs so much that I feel sick in the stomach. For the record, Gates did not kill Apple. It was Jobs who killed Apple. Whereas Gates made his OS for an open hardware that provided excellent price/value point. Jobs made a colour-blinded hardware with half decent OS but kept his prices sky high and kept the whole system closed in a mold. Had he been willing to play ball and share the technology with others by licensing it and allowing others to make clones of either the hardware or the software, Apple would have been in a far better shape today. Jobs carried the same close-minded mentality to Next with an even greter desasterous results. We can debate this all you want. But the bottom line is that Jobs took a very arroagant and stuborn stance against the industry and his customers, and they voted with their money and hung Apple to dry. By the time Apple decided to do something about it, it was too late. Ask all non-Apple users who've been around for a few years, why they did not choose Apple over PC, and the unanimous answer is that it was too expensive. On another note, I read an article over the weekend titiled "Gates is the opposite of Darth Vader". The point being that Darth Vader was a good man in a scary custume entraped by machines. And gates is an evil man in the dressed like a geek with a bad hair cut. Kinda funny. ST