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: Dan3 who wrote (92549)	11/15/1999 11:56:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, <the 16 to 32 bit transition is where Microsoft took out IBM in the software business.> Speaking of which, how long after Intel's 386 (the first x86 32-bit processor) introduction before Microsoft started using the 32-bit instructions? Even now, Windows 98 SE has some 16-bit legacy left. <It's not like AMD has a choice (Intel isn't going to license IA-64 to them)> That's what Kash told me, and from that point-of-view, it makes sense. Since it seems that no one else will be extending the x86 instruction set to 64-bit, AMD is going after the passed-up opportunity. Tenchusatsu

To: Dan3 who wrote (92549)	11/16/1999 12:26:00 AM
From: Saturn V	Respond to of 186894

Ref-<It may not be particularly relevant, but the 16 to 32 bit transition is where Microsoft took out IBM in the software business. IBM pushed 32 bit OS2 early and hard, while Microsoft kept its 16-bit-with-some-32-bit-extensions-tacked-on-but-it-still-runs-dBASE II windows 3.X. This is the strategy that AMD is going for. > Your analogy is pretty flawed. Microsoft had Windows out for several years.Finaly all the software developers jumped on the Windows platform with Windows3.0 in 1990. The OS2 appeared a year or two later, and due to inept marketing by IBM an insignificant amount of software got written for OS2. Due to the larger installed base of Windows3 , software developers automatically wrote their software for Windows3.x, perpetuating the Microsoft hegemony. Software development for the Itanium has been in progress for several years.Numerous OS's have already been ported to Itanium,and applications have already been written. Since most software will already have transitioned to Itanium by the time AMD's 64bit processor appears, the `easier transition' argument will be moot. The x86 emulation on the Itanium also weakens the `easy transition' argument. Either Intel will have to grossly fumble on Itanium, or else the AMD 64 bit will have to offer a compelling performance advantage. None of these possibilities appear likely. I agree that AMD's choices for 64bit are limited and it is forced into a corner. Who knows something totally unexpected might come out of left field, and AMD may have a better answer for that application. The history of technology and business is full of serendipity and surprises.