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: Mani1 who wrote (89626)	1/25/2000 10:58:00 PM
From: steve harris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583676

Mani, you want silly? Message 12644673 how about DELL- four weeks for a P3-800 ggggggg So much for some people's reality, huh? steve

To: Mani1 who wrote (89626)	1/26/2000 12:52:00 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Respond to of 1583676

Mani - RE: "In San Diego's fry's beside HP, NO OTHER OEM has a single PIII system at 650MHz, Or at 667 MHz Or at 700 MHz, Or at 733 MHz, Or at 750 MHz, Or at 800 MHz. When where those product announced by Intel?" I don't know if everyone remembers this, but the main reason for Coppermine being FLOPPERMINE is because of the original DELAY. Cuontimemine was supposed to come out on Sept. 5 at 600MHz, but Intel had problems making them and Intel let the world know it was going to come out later than originally planned. It had something to do with yield problems and the processor not being able to run at its proper clock speed except at room temperature. Paul gave a nice description of the problems on the Intel thread. As we all know from the "mask" problem, it takes time for for fixes to take place. The lack of FLOPPERMINES in quantity everywhere like previous Intel processors is a result of this original muck up. Combine the original problems with Intel releasing higher MHz faster than ever and we have the current situation where availability is nowhere near close to historical availability. Pitiful would be the proper word to describe the comparison. Now that there is more .18 production and yields are supposed to be fine and the ramp is supposed to be fine we should be seeing more Coppermines. I guess they are just around the corner.

To: Mani1 who wrote (89626)	1/26/2000 12:54:00 AM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 1583676

<Your continued defense of Intel is this matter is just getting plain silly.> It was silly defending CuMine in October when it was clear that there was no CuMine to be had in the channel at launch. Now, it is a joke.

To: Mani1 who wrote (89626)	1/26/2000 1:57:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583676

Mani, if I didn't know any better, and I listened only to you and the other die-hard AMD supporters, I would have sworn that AMD was shipping twice as many processors as Intel. <Your continued defense of Intel is this matter is just getting plain silly.> My mistake. I thought I could use reason to back up my arguments, or what I thought was reason. Since I'm getting my reasonable arguments thrown back in my face, perhaps I should just give it up. As usual, Mani, you're getting a little too passionate in your pro-AMD, anti-Intel posts. Tenchusatsu