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: Mary Cluney who wrote (142606)	9/1/2001 5:50:08 PM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

> When they do replace their computers, IMO, they should opt for the most advanced and powerful computers they can afford regardless of what their consultants tell them. To try to find the optimum speed grade for their processors (excuse the expression) is like high tech masturbation. < Interesting. Even Intel's internal IT folks don't do that. They realize that buying something six months old saves tons of money and is unlikely to make a difference in typical use. People buy hardware to support software, or at the very least future expected software. Not just to have the latest and sexiest. You seem incapable of dealing with the fact that this is the case. Otellini, in his IDF keynote, made it pretty clear that he DOES see this. It also made it clear that he sees something that you don't. Namely that the speed of the processor is no longer usually the bottleneck, and that MHz are no longer the key criteria. Fast disk drives and an upgraded network make a much bigger difference in real world performance. Simply put, all the stuff around the processor has just not kept up with Moore's law. All that stuff needs to catch up before the processor speed makes a big difference in real world applications. mg