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: Dan3 who wrote (159979)	2/24/2002 3:42:47 PM
From: Monica Detwiler	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan 3 - Now there you go again, Dan3 - Intel makes you re-write the software you invested years and dollars, sometimes millions of dollars, in writing and testing. AMD doesn't. You know that isn't the truth - don't you Dan3? In fact, it is indeed another lie from you - isn't it Dan? Existing x86 code runs just fine on Intel x86 servers - no need to rewrite anything - the same code that will run on AMD's Hammer in 32 bit mode. But 64 bit x86 code has to be rewritten entirely for AMD's Hammer - now isn't that the God's honest truth, Dan3, in order to address the extra regitsres, memory and other x86-64 resources? Tell the truth, Dan3 - if you can even recognize the truth anymore. Monica

To: Dan3 who wrote (159979)	2/24/2002 4:03:12 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dan, Re: "Intel makes you re-write the software you invested years and dollars, sometimes millions of dollars, in writing and testing. AMD doesn't." Most businesses update their software base every few years. Some don't of course, and that's one of the reasons why IBM and others can continue selling legacy Unix machines for huge premiums, and people will buy it. Those same people are even reluctant to shift their software base to x86 - they are still using VMS or some other Unix OS that's outdated by at least a decade. These businesses are the minority, Dan, not the majority. The majority of businesses actually employ the Microsoft model of updating their software library every couple of years. They buy the newest Microsoft operating systems, the newest Office Suits, the newest SQL or Oracle databases, and the newest updates to their business apps, all over the course of 2-3 years - then lather, rinse, repeat - they'll do it again. This model is actually gaining share, since Microsoft continues to make headway in high end businesses. I also know this is true, since hundreds of high end software developers continue to make money by offering upgrades of their current popular titles. If businesses weren't upgrading their software, then these developers wouldn't be making money. Again, this is simple logic. The idea for Itanium (and even Netburst, to a degree), is that it fits perfectly with this increasingly popular software model. Intel isn't making businesses rewrite software - these businesses do it because they already intend to rewrite their software. Intel is simply making sure that their optimizations are included in the next version. But speaking of custom or proprietary code, if Intel will have trouble getting people to upgrade with their specific optimizations (as you seem to think), then how the frick do you expect AMD to convince them to program for x86-64? wbmw