SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Charles R who wrote (81411)11/29/1999 3:12:00 PM
From: vince doran  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572874
 
Chuck -

Oh yes, here and carefully following your and others commentary, just not able to add value lately. I missed part of the move from 18, and I remain concerned about AMD's ability to capture greater share with Athlon as long as performance parity exists, but perhaps the overall demand is so strong that AMD can sell all they can currently make anyway. I think that the lack of new OEM converts (and the Gateway hedging) is due to their perception that performance parity is insufficient to hang their marketing hats on.

So much for caution. The GOOD news is, as we all know here, that for the next ~six months the ball is squarely in AMDs court, and the architecture is with them. They WILL benefit shortly from KX133 mobos. They MAY soon be able to run away with the MHz lead, and that alone would do it. They CAN add on-die L2 for what should be CUmine-killing performance, but if it cannot be done before Willa hype hits, the effect will be somewhat muted. If they can do all those things by say Mar 30, we will all be very glad we were long AMD in Dec. If they can only do the mobos by then... I dunno. Probably still safe to own the stock, but the options get dicey.

Hopefully needless to say, I would be very interested in the thread's opinion of potential milestone's in the next 6 months. Particularly the timing of Thunderbird, since I think the overclockers will soon tell us something about the MHz abilities of the .18u product.

may the potential become kinetic,
Vince




To: Charles R who wrote (81411)11/29/1999 4:30:00 PM
From: Astro59  Respond to of 1572874
 
Intel faces possible Euro block on Pentium IIIs

From:
theregister.co.uk

"A report from the STOA Committee of the European Union has suggested that the economic bloc look long and hard at the implications of Intel's personal serial number (PSN) embedded in the Pentium III microprocessor.

(We know it's really dubbed the processor serial number, but our substitution of personal seems oh so apposite.)

The STOA (scientific and technological options assessment) committe is presenting its findings to the European Parliament, in connection with the development of surveillance technology and the risk of abuse of economic information.

According to a report presented by Franck Leprevost to the committee, and called Encryption and Cryptosystems in Electronic Surveillance, there is a prima facie case that the PSN breaches European protocols on security.

The report recommends close examination of the role of the role of both the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National Security Agency (NSA), in relation to the Pentium III's embedded security number.

In part of the report, Leprevost states: "The PSN is very different from the IP (Internet Protocol) address, even though a user?s IP address can be revealed to any webpage he or she chooses to visit.

"IP addresses are not as permanent as PSNs: many users have no fixed IP address that can be used to track their movements, as they may use masks via the proxy servers of Internet service providers. ISPs normally assign a different IP number per session and per user.

"Users can also change ISP, use a service which guarantees their anonymity, etc. As it stands, the PSN can therefore be used for electronic surveillance purposes."

The news report, in German, may be found here, while the full report to the committee can be downloaded from this page."



To: Charles R who wrote (81411)11/29/1999 4:46:00 PM
From: ajbrenner  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572874
 
Sorry