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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (73642)	3/6/2002 1:13:04 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Interesting, all my messeges from my Inbox disappeared. Joe

To: Joe NYC who wrote (73642)	3/6/2002 2:10:46 AM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, Re: Jim agrees. "IA32 will provide a phenomenal value proposition - for a decade - but the high end is where Intel is trying to get into, that's the focus, and a Yamhill extension doesn't provide that the reliability and scaling that IA-64 offers. That's built into IA-64. IPF is already 64 bits; you can plug-it in down the road; the 64bitness is already there." Sounds like the HP exec is ready to throw in the towel, eh? He's really saying that Yamhill is the future - no, wait. He's really saying that Hammer is the future, and to make sure you don't buy their new McKinley based zx1 chipset, because HP will be transitioning to Hammer shortly afterward. Right? I just want to make sure I understand the hidden meaning that everybody else except for me must be seeing from your link. After all, everybody says that Yamhill is Plan B, and that Intel is simply waiting to cancel Itanium. Since this HP exec you mentioned knows about Yamhill, and he's willing to give The Register an exclusive scoop into the whole dirty business, then he must also be aware of Intel's plans to cancel Itanium if AMD becomes too much of a threat. Therefore, I'm still trying to find the hidden meaning that must be in the above sentence. TIA for any hints you can give. wbmw

To: Joe NYC who wrote (73642)	3/6/2002 1:04:38 PM
From: dale_laroy	Respond to of 275872

What part of this did you not understand? >Jim agrees. " IA32 will provide a phenomenal value proposition - for a decade - but the high end is where Intel is trying to get into, that's the focus, and a Yamhill extension doesn't provide that the reliability and scaling that IA-64 offers. That's built into IA-64. IPF is already 64 bits; you can plug-it in down the road; the 64bitness is already there."< Jim is clearly stating that IA-64 will outlast x86-64 in the server/workstation market. The implication is that Yamhill is no more than a means of continuing to cache in on IA32 during the transition. Intel does not plan on supporting x86-64, only including it as part of the marketing checklist for some future IA32 processor, sort of like MMX is one of the items on the current checklist.