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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kash johal who wrote (62389)	6/19/1999 12:26:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571931

kash - <Just my opinion.> And a fairly reasonable one. However, I'm sure Intel took into account a lot of variables in coming up the the November release date. <Look we all know that sh*t happens ok so no big deal.> With my previous windy response I was responding to Gary's apparent feeling that Intel management was somehow hiding the true situation before they announced. I strongly disagree with this type of assertion. PB

To: kash johal who wrote (62389)	6/19/1999 12:27:00 AM
From: Gary Ng	Respond to of 1571931

kash, Re: IMHO they should have delayed it till next year and still worked like hell to meet the November date I don't think so. A company like Intel with its perfect execution record(not lately though) should not use these sandbagging stuff. IMO they are doing the right thing, make the best estimate and work damn hard on meeting that. This had the added benefit that if it slip again, it can uncover more potential problems. Take this latest slip as an example, it should uncover quite some issues in the whole process and get fixed to prevent it from happening in the future such as why the simulation doesn't come out as expected etc. Gary