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: semiconeng who wrote (127535)	2/16/2001 1:55:41 PM
From: stribe30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Semi: I am sure JC doesnt need me to stand up for him and can defend himself if he wants to, but JC just got accused last week of the exact opposite.. alwlays trumpeting Intel news and low-keying AMD stuff.. and thus he must be Intel-biased.. I figure if both sides accuse him of bias.. he must be doing an ok job of staying in the middle.. FWIW.. I find him very objective and far from being a "niceguy" cheerleader.. levels criticism at AMD when its appropriate. Again.. my opinion only as well.

To: semiconeng who wrote (127535)	2/16/2001 1:57:26 PM
From: maui_dude	Respond to of 186894

Thread, Here's a link to a report on Intel posted on the AMD moderated thread (thanks Albert). Message 15364951 The interesting part is a breakdown of Intel Revenues in Q4 '00 in different markets. Anybody have a similar breakdown from a year ago to compare ? Thanks. Maui.

To: semiconeng who wrote (127535)	2/16/2001 2:49:01 PM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

> Frequently, when JC mentions AMD news on his board, he also make statements like "GEE WIZ" or "Isn't This GREAT" > or "Oh MAN I Can't Wait". In contrast, whenever he posts intel news, it's more in the format of "Oh, by the way" I don't believe you. I think you are mistaken. I will assert that my website covers AMD much more often than it covers other topics. I have various reasons for this, but I think you're very mean if you're grouping me with websites like AMDZone or VIA Hardware which (while often outputting quality material) do not hesitate to insult the competition of their focus at every turn. I'm not sure I ever said "GEE WIZ" or "Oh Man I Can't Wait" on my website. I could be wrong, but I think that these are gross exaggerations. I am often very careful to point out that different products have advantages in different areas. In the midst of the old pre-K7/Coppermine speculation wars, I was one of the few to assert that the Coppermine could have a strong advantage in memory and cache dependent applications, while the K7 would have its strength in heavy floating-point computation. I'm sure that sounds totally obvious to everybody now, but back then I had to fight tons of insults from both sides in order to maintain this position, which was later proven correct. > JC has stated on his newsboard that he is an investor in AMD. He states no such thing for > intel. Anyone investing in one company and not the other, can't possibly be "unbiased" (including myself). Pbbblllt. I invest in both AMD and Intel (and I couple other stocks, but I am a poor person, so it's not like increases in either stock will suddenly make me a rich megalomaniac). My highest paying advertising contract is an all Intel retail shop. And they don't do Palm Pilots, which I particularly like, too (doh!). And 50% of my ignore list consists of niceguy767, a savage (but usually decently nice) AMD cheerleader. If anything, my fundamentals suggest that I'm Intel biased (well, perhaps that's a stretch -- I would more properly claim that I am totally unbiased in everything in the universe, but then again, everybody would like to make that claim, wouldn't they?<g>) > JC Constantly hangs out on the SI Moderated AMD Thread, and frequently makes posts there. > In contrast, I can only recall seeing a post from him once on this board. The first time I posted at SI:Intel I was directly and very explicitly insulted by one of the posters here. The post that I made was not, as my memory tells it, harshly critical of Intel, but nonetheless I was treated as if I were here just to piss people off. When I get insulted, I usually do not fight back. I have been trained from birth to be subservient to the wishes of others, and therefore I typically retreat from violence. I retreated from this thread, basically, because I was not liked from the start. I am a good person, and I participate wherever I'm welcome. But I have my limits, and those limits are very, very shallow, unfortunately. In addition, regardless of the commentary attached, the folks in the AMD threads are particularly aggressive in posting both good and bad Intel news (because that pertains to the AMD stock). This is because Intel figures immensely in AMD's present and future. The people in the Intel thread post lots of stuff on Intel, but do not post a lot (well, proportionally not as much) about AMD. This is because AMD is not as much a factor in Intel's survival as is vice versa, not because Intel posters are particularly mean or biased (except for that one guy). > Coclusion: It is clear to me where JC's loyalties lie, and where they do not. Therefore, I take all > of his statements concerning intel with the same grain of salt that I would from any AMDroid That word, "AMDroid", is really rude. I don't like being grouped into a stereotype which isn't even accurate for 90% of its members. I also grew up trained to have people make fun of me because I am a "computer nerd". You seriously hurt me by saying that. Just like the fellow about two weeks ago who called me an "Intel suck-ass" because I said I had faith in McKinley (granted, I'm biased towards Intel there, probably, because two of my friends have worked on that project). Constructive criticism is my vitamin. Dismissing me in the third person is my acid. I live by those two thoughts. -JC