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: dumbmoney who wrote (156949)	1/26/2002 2:57:19 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 186894

RE:Flash forward to the present. The lowly x86 is the fastest thing around (mainly for economic, rather than technical, reasons - large profits enable and justify a large R&D effort), blowing away SPARC in performance. Isn't that funny? And the first IA-64 chip is a joke, a total dog. So why does Intel still need Itanium? Why not re-allocate those resources to a more profitable use? "It's 64-bits!" is not a good enough reason to keep Itanium around, especially when you can easily extend the x86 to 64-bits." Finally, someone with some vision. I believe Intel will work on both. Then again I was one of the few around here who suggested Intel should cover their butt with x86-64. Someone even asked me why. I couldn't believe it. Jim