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: gvatty who wrote (247261)	2/2/2008 11:58:25 AM
From: jay101	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

<<...AMD will sacrifice the potential of immediate profit for a charitable purpose>> APPLAUSE, APPLAUSE, APPLAUSE, APPLAUSE,.......... APPLAUSE!!! .... AMD sounds like MOther Terresa! Read this ... Negropante wanted everything his way with NO ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS: theinquirer.net Negropante wants Intel back ........: <According to Infoworld, Negroponte calls what happened with Intel "very unfortunate" and says that he hopes "there's a way of rebuilding it in the future because there's no interest in OLPC pushing Intel out."> engadget.com Some more background: economist.com

To: gvatty who wrote (247261)	2/2/2008 2:52:48 PM
From: Vattila	Respond to of 275872

> My guess and speculation is that when Intel was on the board of the OLPC they thought they could pressure into a windows based operating system, Intel software, and more Intel component parts. Well, as far as I know, getting Windows onto the XO is an activity of the OLPC project to which Microsoft is committed. It seems Intel was welcome to contribute to that. Negroponte and co also complained that Intel didn't contribute a single line of code to the XO operating system and software. Thirdly, OLPC hoped Intel would contribute to the development of the hardware; i.e. an Intel-based XO variant. OLPC's aim was lower cost and higher capabilities, something Intel obviously was not capable of or willing to do (i.e. invest in). > I'm sure they wanted to use the OLPC to expand their market like you suggested. Yes, it seems they could have contributed and avoided all the bad publicity while expanding their market by following a different strategy. But Intel have their own educational and market development programs, and I guess they just felt they could maximize their return by going it alone. When you have Intel's clout and resources I guess you don't accept to be just a contributor. You want no less than total control. > It seemed clear from Intel's actions and withdrawl that their involvement in the OLPC was for marketing purposes vs. a charitable purpose. I don't think the bad publicity does Intel any good; hence it was not a very wise marketing move. I think they went into OLPC to stay, but they just underestimated the clash between the OLPC vision and their own market development strategy. > AMD had a potential product they were developing that was destroyed by the OLPC, the AMD PIC I think it was called. AMD sold the PIC design and it is still in production. You'll find links to it and other Geode products on AMD's 50x15 pages. I guess it was hard for AMD to market the PIC. When OLPC came along it was the better idea, and AMD could play their part in a larger organisation. It was also synergetic with their 50x15 endeavour. Intel came from the opposite end of the spectrum.