To: Mary Cluney who wrote (94428 ) 12/21/1999 9:34:00 AM From: Tony Viola Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 186894
Mary, I saw enough stuff to pique my interest in your post, even though it's addressed to Carl:AMD relative to Intel is a tiny competitor and a mismanaged one at that. We knew from many years ago, following this and the AMD thread the Athlon specs and AMD roadmap. Why is it that we are now scrambling, in a neck to neck race, to capture the speed title? Having "top gun" has always been important in the computer world. E.g., IBM always spends a lot to get their title back from their competitors in the enterprise server market (mainframes), whenever they happen to grab it. I can't say right now why it's important, like, in the car market, you don't see Benz and BMW going back and forth in the area of power. And, if you've ever driven on the Autobahn, you wouldn't say the top end of perf. isn't used! Still, with them, it's more luxury and SAFETY now; safety would be something like the equivalent of computer's RAS. An aside, I'm seeing lots of signs that Intel is really stepping up RAS for Itanium. Great.This may indeed still be the case, but how in h?@% can you tell. No wonder the stock is selling at way below CISCO, MSFT and AMD multiples. Investors are telling us something. We don't know what is going on. Intel's P/E is running ~ 2X historical average. So is Cisco, actually more! Microsoft is actually relatively cheap in that regard right now. AMD? Why did you put such a company in with these gorillas? Intel is stoic, spartan, compared with Cisco, e.g. Maybe you can email Intel and ask if Bryant, and whoever else you think needs it, try to get into the next executive charm school with John Chambers. Might rub off. Tony