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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86984)	8/19/1999 8:03:00 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Sounds to me as if an HWP employee was trying to sell servers to people that were talking about putting off a purchase until next year upon Merced's release. In the process he says something stupid.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86984)	8/19/1999 7:39:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Tenchusatsu - Re:" Telling people to skip Merced and wait for McKinley is pretty self-defeating advice, don't you think?" Excellent point - kinda like p*ssing in their own soup - then expecting customers to buy that soup. Paul

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (86984)	8/20/1999 3:46:00 PM
From: Rob Young	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 186894

Tench, Yes.. this doesn't make sense.. Ya know last year this same division was saying something similar. What I don't understand is why the PA-RISC side of the house isn't on a shorter leash. "Hold off until McKinley" If Merced was decent, why the statement? PA-RISC would be comparable. If Merced sucks, why the statement? Stomping on IDF and Merced news to come (real soon now) wouldn't be the politcally correct thing to do. Regarding the software base. I don't follow. How well would Merced do re: native PA-RISC 8600 performance? Probably not well at all. So who then "is the guinea pig" to suggest "let's roll in Merced boxes to run HP/UX" ... they would probably be laughed out of the conference room. Let's roll in a Merced box to play with.. okay. But why not wait until McKinley as they would have to do a recompile anyhow to see grand performance, right? VLIW and all that, right? Other issues.. how to establish a software base, etc. Since HP/UX 11.0 supports clustering, high availabilty servers, etc. etc. you can't roll-in and incorporate a Merced based box into an existing cluster, different binaries. You wonder how Merced HP/UX does at all. What I am guessing is HP/UX binaries running on Merced sucks as far as performance leaving HP/UX users in a catch-22 regarding Merced outlined above. Sound plausable? Question comes back: Who uses Merced and why? We've had this discussion several times here.. Obviously not HP/UX. Again, (re-asking our question): What is Merced's target market and why? Win64 Linux (this one is very questionable, IA32 better price, Alpha much better performance and much better price ;-) ????? Fill in the OS here (Monterey?) Rob