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: tcmay who wrote (137264)	6/13/2001 2:08:01 AM
From: stak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Tim, >>For many of them, it makes little sense to buy a blazingly fast PC if overall throughput for many intended uses is throttled by the dial-up speed. Compression can only go so far (typically not much more than 2x), so a faster CPU is not of much use.<< Do you feel Microsoft's .Net will put more demands on the processor and make people feel that it's necessary to upgrade? >>I figure this is why a _lot_ of individual users are shrugging at the prospect of replacing their systems for a marginal improvement in speed, and why many corporations are deciding to save money by not upgrading the systems they installed in droves in 1999 in preparation for Y2K.<< I think so too, it's this apathy that's killing sales. There has to be some discernible difference to make individuals fork out. Moving up the GHZ range to 2.0 and beyond will make the improvement even harder to notice. There's not much way around it. I wonder if for how many of the corporations it's just a case of having no money left to spend on upgrades? >>People who have access to cable modems or ADSL are getting this, but I would expect those people are slightly _more_ likely to get faster CPUs than those who are still stuck with 56K or slower dial-ups.<< I would have agreed with you about "those people are slightly _more_ likely to get faster CPUs" in the past. I think those that have just got broadband are pumped up and they want to see what a faster CPU can do for them too. But after awhile( when they have to use dial-up again) many realize that the pipe is more important to them than the CPU. So they(myself included) are tied into 600$/year instead of ~$275, which is around $600 over a 2 year period that could have gone to upgrading to the fastest CPU. One note: Our area has had blanket high speed availability for 4-5 years and it changes the way of thinking about computer use. Many still use slower PCs because their usability comes from the net, not from their apps on the hard drive. >>In contrast to your point, I'd expect those with slow connections are in no hurry to upgrade to the fastest CPUs. It's probably not a matter of either/or.<< Yes that could very well be, I'd like to see a survey on what PC users value more nowadays, processor speed or bandwidth speed. And why or why aren't you upgrading to the fastest CPUs.

To: tcmay who wrote (137264)	6/13/2001 7:36:44 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 186894

TC, Good post. I agree the absence of broadband is more likely to contain PC demand than the presence of broadband. re: And for most uses, the difference between an 800 MHz PIII and and a 1 GHz PIII or Athlon or a 1.4 Ghz PIV is roughly meaningless. I figure this is why a _lot_ of individual users are shrugging at the prospect of replacing their systems for a marginal improvement in speed, and why many corporations are deciding to save money by not upgrading the systems they installed in droves in 1999 in preparation for Y2K. Most of the pre-Y2K computers are running at less than 500 MHz. Going to 800 MHz / 1 GHz is attractive but not compelling. Early next year my WAG is that minimum speed will be ~1.2 GHz with the maximum ~2.2 GHz. And for corporations, the Y2K PC's will start to become fully depreciated. The case for an upgrade goes from attractive to compelling, for both the consumer market and corporate market. My take on the current PC demand slowdown is that we coincidentally started a general business down cycle at almost the exact same time that we hit a semiconductor down cycle. A double hit to demand. My WAG is that the semi cycle should start to pick up as early as the 4th quarter this year or as late as the 2nd quarter next year. No clue when the general business cycle will kick back into high gear, after an unusually long ~10 year expansion. John