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: NITT who wrote (169845)	8/23/2002 12:55:38 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

From your post: It appears that AMD is desperate and has nothing to loose by introing unavailable products in order to try to slow the erosion in market share and get one more headline. AMD needs to keep the OEMs and motherboard suppliers motivated to continue the pipeline that supports Athalon. Oh, heck, why not: from the Good Dr. McGee: Is MS hanging fire on 64-bit Opteron support? Windows.NET server futures outlined By INQUIRER staff: Friday 23 August 2002, 16:26 AN ARTICLE ON Japanese site PC Watch writes about a briefing Microsoft gave journalists earlier this week about 64-bit products it is proposing. One 64-bit OS is conspicuous by its absence, it would appear. Microsoft has outlined, according to the article, four different types of .NET server – Web, Standard, Enterprise and Datacenter – and the article gives an interesting table describing the differences between these products. In particular, the table outlines IA-64 support, memory requirements, Numa support and also whether the products will support multiple CPUs. The OSes are tailored to the type of CPU, as the table shows, but what's interesting here is that there doesn't seem to be support for the X86-64 platform – 213.219.40.69 I guess that leaves 32 Bit Unix for amd's o/s.

To: NITT who wrote (169845)	8/23/2002 1:00:24 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Nitt, Thanks for stating your opinion. I don't know how many samples Intel or AMD send in general, or in this particular situation. Your opinion is that very few in this case, which I can't disprove, since I don't have the facts. I am not sure if you can prove your statement is a fact, or it is just your opinion. The fact is that the production chips are not available for sale to end users yet, and nobody is arguing with that. Beyond that, we can only speculate. As far as AMD requesting the return of chips sent out to reviewers, I think they have a right to do so. But I hope you are not arguing Windsock's idiotic point that the samples were unstable. Joe