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: GVTucker who wrote (153191)	12/26/2001 10:39:05 AM
From: Amy J	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Hi GV, RE: "While the PII Xeon sales were indeed initially slow, I don't remember them being anywhere close to being THAT slow." Significantly new platform. And significantly higher-end market. Deployment of a significantly new platform takes significant time for IHVs/OEMs/ISVs to deploy their new products around this platform. Compare this to how long it took Windows to take off. Windows 1.0 anyone? No, probably more like how long it took until the industry reached widespread Win application deployment - Windows 3.1. Hope you had a nice holiday. Regards, Amy J

To: GVTucker who wrote (153191)	12/27/2001 11:34:03 AM
From: semiconeng	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

According to Gartner, computer makers have shipped 1700 Itanium based workstations and 2600 Itanium based servers this year. While the PII Xeon sales were indeed initially slow, I don't remember them being anywhere close to being THAT slow. Absolutely.... but if I remember though, intel took a different road on the way from 16 bit/32 bit than it's taken this time. Initially, the 32 bit instruction set was an extension of 16, not completely new 32 from the get go. This time, things are different. Despite what most intel fans claim, I think that Itanium was always meant to be a development system. I think intel was willing to give them away, in order to seed the ground for McKinley and subsequent chips. If intel made any money on Itanium, fine, if not, fine. As long as the applications get developed. They took a lesson from Gilette. When they invented the safety razor, they had a tough time getting men to switch over from straight razors. So they gave away the razors, to sell the blades. Eventually, almost everyone was using safety razors, and Gilette made millions. I don't care if intel gives away Itanium..... As long as it establishes IA-64 as the priemier "blade" in town. :-) Semi