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: semiconeng who wrote (166360)	6/14/2002 4:56:57 PM
From: Charles Gryba	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

semi, why would I need to spread FUD? I am not short Intc. C

To: semiconeng who wrote (166360)	6/14/2002 5:47:47 PM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

> Opinions from someone, about what Companies are going to buy, from someone who doesn't make the purchasing decisions. < Unfortuanately, most of the people in this thread don't seem particularly interested in knowing what the purchasing decision-makers are thinking. It seems that most people here seem to live for the endless techie sniping at each other's products. My observation, based on discussions with numerous purchasing managers is as follows: There will be no significant wave of upgrades until there is a new generation of applications that require the upgraded hardware in order to operate efficiently. (By which I mean, the point where the cost of the upgrade is less than the ongoing cost of not upgrading, which may be measured in lost productivity or missing functionality). At the desktop level that is not in the forseeable future for most users. In enterprise apps (running on servers) there are some newer versions coming out, but CIOs and the people who control their purse-strings are increasingly skeptical as to whether there is any real benefit to the upgrades in many cases. As such, the corporate market is dependent on three things: * replacement of defective machines * addition of new machines or capacity to accommodate greater numbers of users. * Upgrades to accommodate whatever new software projects are authorized. The first is hardly a growth business. The second is dependent on adding new employees, which doesn't seem to be happenning at the moment in most industries. The third is muted at the moment, and usually very targeted. I see some things going on with web services, EAI and data mining that are likely to push more processing onto the server from the desktop in the long term, but most companies are proceeding slowly with these things. Government spending for national defense is a big wildcard in some markets. None of this is particularly good for either AMD or Intel, or for any of companies they sell to. In that context I'm less concerned about which architecture is going to prevail in the next generation of servers than I am about when corporate executive finally see something compelling enough to make them feel the need to upgrade in large enough numbers to spur greater growth than we are currently experiencing. mg