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: pgerassi who wrote (155965)	4/13/2005 3:16:36 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Pete So are you saying Intel is in error? Back for more? I thought you'd at least cool it for a while hoping people would forget your blunders. It's just a general table and 90nm Comms products weren't big enough volume to bother listing. You've seen numerous documents saying Intel has another 300mm 90nm process besides the one for Processors. You've seen Intel's own links showing a released Network Processor on that 90nm process in production and available. You were simply wrong when you claimed I said 300mm fabs were used for chipsets. You were wrong again when you claimed there were no Comms products running in those 300mm fabs. You have a nearly perfect record of being wrong and still you won't quit. Pete I suggest you just drop this. You're in way over your head and you're continuly making a fool of yourself. A question for you: You've made accusations about me and every time you try to prove them you look like a complete fool. Seeing as you're the one who keeps making false statement after false statement, why shouldn't you be called a liar rather than me? I've had a long policy here of not ignoring people unless they lie about me. That's the only thing I won't put up with. You've crossed the line and been given every opportunity to back up your claims and time's up. Ignore on.

To: pgerassi who wrote (155965)	4/13/2005 3:44:43 PM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 275872

Elmer still thinks rambus was a huge technical success for Intel. And he thinks that Intel spent billions developing Itanium so it could sell a few thousand a month as HP Unix servers. And he thinks that Prescott P4 has the same IPC as Opteron. Since Elmer swears that Flash is a money maker for Intel, ask him what part of their comm business loses $800 million per quarter (more than $800 million - flash profits make up some of the losses, right Elmer?). It must be that the little network phy chips that UMC and TSMC can easily FAB for a buck or so each cost Intel $500 per to produce. Then ask him who's FABs are crap.