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: Dave who wrote (149239)	11/23/2001 2:09:07 PM
From: greg s	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dave, Good post! re: While everyone talks about "upgradablity", few users truly "upgrade" their computers. Instead of "upgrading" users go out and purchase a new computer And, I may add, this new computer usually comes loaded with the newest, fully optimized software for the platform. Your point was well taken. Intel has proven over and over again that they can drive innovation in the market. The reason AMD fans have trouble understanding this is they believe in the AMD "follower" strategy. They have never seen AMD drive a MAJOR sea change in the market such as IA-64. It's either that or they refuse to see the obvious. Of course, it is inevitable that Intel stops dropping bread crumbs for AMD to follow. This started years ago and will be a done deal when IA-64 hits it's stride. In the meantime, AMD fans focus on benchmarks of current platforms, etc., not seeing the daisy cutter dropping from the sky. greg

To: Dave who wrote (149239)	11/23/2001 2:19:59 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dave, <<<In conclusion, I believe AMD will always be a "me too" company and will never be able to take out Intel; AMD also may not be around, which I would not like to see. AMD could survive by differentiating their product offerings from Intel and attack the market with a novel, unique chip.>>> Good post. I agree completely. I think both companies would be better off if AMD could find their own market niche. But, Jerry Sanders is probably too obstinate to ever see this. In that way, he is probably like Captain Ahab, gunning for that big white whale. Too much false pride. But, the thing that bugs me the most are the AMDroids on SI. They are equally as obstinate as Jerry Sanders. They mislead themselves and they to try to mislead the investing public. They don't mislead themselves so much , however, that they actually invest in AMD themselves. They only encourage others to invest in AMD. That really stinks. Mary

To: Dave who wrote (149239)	11/23/2001 2:36:27 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: AMD needs to differentiate its product offering from Intel. Can't be done. Intel sees any AMD success as a deadly threat to itself, and will dump product into any market in which AMD makes money - as long as Intel remains capable of affording such. While you talk about the IA-64, I recall arguments when Intel came out with the Pentium Pro Utterly and totally different set of circumstances. First of all, Pentium PRO was considerably faster than Pentium on most current code when it was released. PPro only had IPC problems on a some older apps, almost no total performance problems of any kind - and PPro clocked higher than Pentium shortly after its release. Itanium isn't just a matter of using a different internal architecture to execute the X86 installed code base, it's a different instruction set. Convincing customers to substitute Itanium for Pentium/Pentium III/Pentium4/Athlon is the same as trying to get them to switch to Apple, Alpha, SUN, or PowerPC - and even the mid-range and high end markets have been moving towards X86/IBM PC compatible instruction set processors like Xeon, PIII, Athlon, and Athlon MP. The IA-64 line of uP represents Intel trying to leverage their dominance in the uP and making an attempt to attack the UNIX market No, extending the huge X-86 installed base into the enterprise is what AMD is doing with its X86-64 design. Intel's Itanium strategy is a clone of DEC/Compaq Alpha's attempted attack on Sparc and PowerPC - and we all know how Alpha turned out.