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: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (106662)	8/2/2000 12:29:51 AM
From: SisterMaryElephant	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 186894

THE WATSONYOUTH, <I thought this was worth re-posting here. At this point, I too find this quite comical. I can only characterize Intel's responses as weak - very weak.> If you think it's comical, imagine what Intel must think. I am not claiming the sample has problems or not, but Tom Pabst, can not be taken too seriously. Consider this quote from his review: "I had been surprised that Intel hadn't got back to me after my 'nasty' Monday article, which accused the Satan Clara based company of producing unstable 1.13 GHz processors." Why would Intel even bother with a person who purposely ( he did it more than once ) defames the location of its headquarters. This is very unprofessional. He later calls himself a journalist: "Basically I can understand Intel. Of course they want the part back so they can try to find out what's wrong with it. However, I prefer to hang on to this buggy little bugger, since it is the only thing to back up my story. Of course Intel wants to find the reason for the system crashes before they make a statement, make a new stepping, write a new micro code update or even start retracting their great new product. Still I doubt that any other journalist in my situation would have hesitated to report on this issue." Point me to an article written by Reuters, or EBN or other professional trade publications were the journalist refers to Intel's headquarters (i.e. Intel) as "satan". I can see how we here on this thread take certain liberties with names, but this is ridiculous, IMHO. Good investing. SK