SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (145169)4/16/2002 2:57:46 AM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1584760
 
Intel Cuts Prices on Pentium 4, Other Chips

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Intel Corp. (INTC.O) cut prices on some of its microprocessors over the weekend, including its second-fast Pentium 4 chip, part of the world's largest chipmaker's long-standing strategy of lowering their cost to make way for new processors.

Intel, based in Santa Clara, California, said it cut the price on its Pentium 4 chip with a clock speed of 2.2 billion cycles per second by 25 percent to $423 each from $562. It also cut prices on its Pentium 4 chips running at 1.9 gigahertz and 2.0 gigahertz by 7 percent and 23 percent, respectively.

The price cuts on the 2.2 gigahertz Pentium 4 follow on the heels of Intel's introduction earlier this month of its 2.4 gigahertz chip. Intel typically rolls out new chips at a price of around $560 and then drops the price of the previously fastest chip several weeks later.

Intel also cut prices on its Pentium III chips designed for notebook computers. It cut the price of its 866 megahertz Pentium III chips by 24 percent to $241 from $316, the 850 megahertz mobile Pentium III by 24 percent to $241 from $316 and on its 800 megahertz Pentium III by 18 percent to $198 from $241.

Intel also cut prices on some of its Xeon processors that are used in workstations and server computers, by 11 percent to 24 percent, and on its Pentium III chip still used in servers by 7 percent.

Intel is expected to announce a new, faster version of the Pentium 4 chip early next month. And, as Intel moves to smaller and smaller line widths on its chips and to larger silicon wafers, production costs are lowered and, overall, performance of the chips increases.

Intel is now well into moving to so-called 0.13 micron process technology and to using larger, 300-millimeter-diameter wafers, from which semiconductors are made.


04/15/02 21:13 ET

Copyright 2002 Reuters Limited.



To: tejek who wrote (145169)4/16/2002 3:40:44 AM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1584760
 
Ted, <I know instinctively what's right.>

And all this time, I thought you and Andreas believed that truth was relative.

Tenchusatsu



To: tejek who wrote (145169)4/16/2002 3:49:57 AM
From: Joe NYC  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584760
 
ted,

They have so much money......why do you care what they pay? They don't care if you and your family eat cake or bread or dirt so why do you care about them.

Just few hours ago, you had no idea what I am talking about, when I say that the center recruitment of the socialist parties is the class warfare, soak the rich propaganda, and now you are almost on a Communist Manifesto stage.

I know you wouldn't have a problem with that but then the poor would struggle trying to pay their taxes and the rich would coast.

It is not yet from everyone according to his abilities, to everyone according to his needs but you Democrats - oops the Democrats and one independent - are edging us closer and closer.

BTW, why would it be difficult for poor people to pay their share? You are assuming that they would tolerate the current size, even if they were required to pay for it.

If they were forced to pay, they would vote to shrink the government very quickly, so that for a person to pay his share would be quite manageable.

BTW, when's the last time the Rep. party has run a Jew or a Catholic for president or VP? Don't you wonder why that is? You think there are no rich Jews or Catholics in the country?

It never crossed my mind. It looks like you gave it some thought. Why is it?

Re: There are some people who have to chose between sending a check to the IRS and having their kids cavities fixed, but the number of these people caught in the middle is decreasing, since more and more people are getting a free ride.

Actually less and less......last year, welfare rolls were the lowest they been in 20 years.


That's a step in the right direction. But I was not talking about complete free-loaders. I was talking about people who, while not being free-loaders, are not pulling their weight, who contribute nothing to running of the government, police, defense, highways, street lights, schools etc.

I am sorry but Stalin was conservative........so was Krushchev. Would you prefer I use that term instead of right wing.

Getting better. First it was right wing = personification of evil, now it is conservative = evil. That's another "independent" observation.

BTW I didn't come to that view on my own......that's a pretty common view.

Yes, mainly among "independents"

It was the Egyptians and the Syrians, and belatedly Jordan who were the aggressors, not the Palestinians. As a result, Israel seized Gaza from Egypt, the Golan Hts from Syria and the WB from Jordan.

Are you saying that Palestinians did not take part? It seems unlikely. Maybe I need to read more on the subject.

You have it turned around........after WW II, Jordan was given control of the WB, Syria the Golan Hts. and Egypt, the Gaza Strip. During the 1947-48 conflict, the Palestinians were pushed into the WB and Gaza as refugees. Later, after the 1967 War when they took those lands away from Jordan and Egypt, the Israelis began to settle in those territories.

I think I said the same thing as you did, just using different rhetoric, using my pro-Israel bias, and you responded saying the same thing with a slightly anti-Israel, pro Palestinian bias.

Actually, not really that bias, but anti-rich bias, pro-poor or pro-(apparent) victim bias.

So there is no need to go back to Adam and Eve; however, I think a good starting point is the arrival of Zionists to the region. After all, the Zionists were the founders of Israel.

Sounds fair. But for how long should that remain the starting point? From when do we take the existance of Israel, and its right to exist where it is as a status quo, and move to a new starting point?

I think after 50+ years, it is about the time to move forward. There must be something about the date you picked that has a significance (other than just fitting your argument).

How did the Palestinian leadership have this power to keep Sharon away?

By simply simply not starting the current round of terrorism. They could have had Palestinian state by now, in WB and Gaza. Barak would still be the president, Sharon would still be sitting on a back bench om Parliament, giving his warnings about how it is a mistake to trust Arafat and how it is all going to fall apart one day.

Joe



To: tejek who wrote (145169)4/16/2002 6:44:41 AM
From: AK2004  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1584760
 
Ted
re: I am sorry but Stalin was conservative........so was Krushchev
you already showed extremely poor knowledge of history so don't dig a dipper hole for yourself

Stalin was a liberal at it's best ........