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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (111827)	9/29/2000 3:21:47 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Respond to of 186894

You have STILL not shown any proof, and I'm losing my patience with you. This will be the last time I respond until you show me some hard evidence that Itanium is "not performing up to snuff." Well, it is also possible that corporate America is expecting an Itanium experience more attune to "nose candy" than one that is simply "up to snuff" Or.... so I'm told. THE WATSONYOUTH

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (111827)	9/30/2000 1:01:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten - Re: "You have STILL not shown any proof, and I'm losing my patience with you. This will be the last time I respond until you show me some hard evidence that Itanium is "not performing up to snuff." Don't forget - Peter Principle made claims about SludgeHumper's superior performance - and I asked him to post such data/benchmarks - then he sniveled and cowered and answered a completely different question - but he NEVER SUPPORTED HIS CLAIMS WITH ANY DATA. Basically, Peter Principle is another Lewinsky - ALL HOT AIR. Paul

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (111827)	10/1/2000 10:21:35 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear Tench: You mean you do not keep on the news at such sites as JC's, Anand's, Ace's, Amdzone, Tom's, Sharky's, EE Times, Register, etc.? You frequently quote them or claim to refer to them. For example search JC's for Itanium news for September 2000 (pick 200009 (09/2000) for month and this is what you get: jc-news.com You can see the top news item. If you do it at the other sites you can see that Itanium is unwanted and the IA-64 compilers are not up to snuff (performance of the code is bad or you would see Intel post SPEC benchmarks (not being released yet did not stop the Coppermine)). Further, you must have read about the Fall IDF and the vendor displaying Itaniums there. The reports all seem to have them state that they can not get Itaniums to reliably run at the release speeds and reading between the lines show that they do not feel that it will ever be releasable and they were just going through the motions hoping for a miracle. It was at one of these reports that I read that the compiler was still not producing good code (read fast and using a high percentage of the resources of Itanium (they probably compare compiler output to hand coded assembly)). If you can not read the news sites for this info, you have stuck your head in the sand. That is where I get a lot of information. Some is received from outside channels and others are deduced. When deducing, I try to show the basis for the deductions. I assume at least average intelligence of the readers of these threads and thus figure they will know when I am doing speculation, deduction, passing on news from other web sites, and / or passing information from the other channels. Unfortunately others deliberately misinterpret my posts to personally attack me. I will give them the benefit of the doubt for the first few times, but with some, I have come to the conclusion that they shoot the messenger rather than admit that the information delivered has the ghost of a chance of being true. Even when it is practically inescapably true, they just personally attack harder. I hope you are not one of them. Pete