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: combjelly who wrote (159217)	2/18/2002 9:36:04 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

JellyWomb - Re: "I am not saying that AMD's engineers are smarter, only that they will have the luxury of doing their work later" MAD engineers have been doing a LOT of their WORK LATER these days - they keep slipping product launches by 6 to 12 months !

To: combjelly who wrote (159217)	2/18/2002 11:56:28 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Combjelly, Re: "does the company you work for allow you to keep full rights to any patents? All the ones I have worked for want everything that I do during my time of employment with them, whether on my own time or company time. Now they may allow my name on said patent, but they keep the rights. Some have even claimed rights to anything done after a certain period of time after I left them, but that likely could not be enforced..." We could argue this back and forth - whether or not Intel ended up with great talent and lots of exclusive IP, or whether they ended up with (as Bill calls it) deadwood and nothing but licensed technology. I think it's silly to assume it's either of those extremes, but the positive thing for Intel is that they did end up with 200+ engineers, many of whom came with a lot of experience. If you read the executive bios that I posted earlier, you'll see that Intel promoted some of those engineers for very good reasons. I would also think that the magnitude of the deal suggests that Intel ended up with something very good in return. If nothing else, Intel ended up with some good talent and experience, and in the best case, they'll have a good amount of IP to go with it. Either way, though, this was exactly what Intel needed to push a very late IA-64 architecture into the market. It tells Intel's customers that Intel has made a commitment to IA-64, and that future cores will continue to be built with cutting edge technology. It was a great way to generate some positive PR, as well as establish a direction for the future. Re: "Note: I am not saying that AMD's engineers are smarter, only that they will have the luxury of doing their work later." I wouldn't call being late to the game a luxury. wbmw