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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (62866)	11/8/2001 12:37:22 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Wanna RE.First, Intel doesn't plan on having licensing fees for 3GIO,<<<<<<<<< And why is that??????? Because Intel is running scared. Scared that if HT becomes the standard, Intel will be kissing AMD's a in order to get a license so Intel can produce their next generation.. Just kidding. If Intel loses the standard, then Intel's ability to control their competition goes up in flames. Intel won't be able to monopolize anyone anymore, by refusing to give them a license. Won't that be just too bad. . I'm not sure what AMD plans for ROI with Hypertransport, or even if the licensing is still free. <<<<<<<<<<<** Sometimes one can get a ROI, without charging fees. By opening Ht, everyone can use, and also contribute engineering, to the final protocol. Which means that when the final protocol is adopted,(I don't believe there is one yet, even though there are products out there already.) it will be adaptable to everone's use, have a lot of support amongst the technical community, and the best part, Intel has no control over the protocol, or your business. That might be AMD's primary ROI. Freedom from Intel's grasp. Intel will have no control over the bus, and who produces for that bus, and will have no way to limit competition on that bus; and AMD won't have to jump through hoops, everytime Intel decides to change buses.

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (62866)	11/8/2001 4:11:01 PM
From: ptanner	Respond to of 275872

wbmw, re: "I think our definitions of "standard" are slightly different - I mean to imply that a standard becomes the required way to hook up components, such that compatibility is maintained throughout an architecture" This was also my response to the adoption of HT by TI. While interest in HT seems to be widespread they seem to be largely isolated and not dependent on interchangability of components. However, its widespread use will increase the engineers familiar with the protocol as well as allow for further refinement. Would the licensing agreements require sharing of advances in HT technology, which could offset the lack of revenue due to the free license. -PT