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: Yousef who wrote (41633)	12/6/1997 11:56:00 AM
From: gnuman	Respond to of 186894

Set-top PC's, the great myth IMO the proposed set-top PC's are just another myth. First of all, for the box to have true functionality it must be a fully implemented PC, with hard disk, operating system and applications. Then an individual must take command of the family entertainment system for use of the PC. You say, "But most homes have multiple TV's and the user can go into another room!" But if the box is a fully functional PC why not just buy a PC? They're cheap, especially those that compete with the set-top! Ah, you say, but the box can be a simple system with content provided by a server on the head-end! And cable provides very high band-width to the user! IMO, another myth. First of all, cable is more analogous to a LAN then to a Web. Picture thousands of people interacting with the head-end server. All kinds of contention and the bandwidth drops significantly. IMO, in fact, most of the time the switched telephone web will provide higher effective bandwidths than cable! Manufacturers talk about IMbit/sec communication on cable channels. Great! But how many channels are committed to the set-top, and how many users are trying to share the channel. Put a thousand users simultaneously trying to interact on a channel and IMO the effective bandwidth is far below the switched telephone network. And until two-way cable modems are reality, all upstream communications still must be done over the phone! But, you say, cable will be great for the internet since most of communications are downstream! But communications are only good if the content desired is resident on the head-end server. I suspect most of the time the desired content will be outside the server. How then does the head-end get the content? Does it have to go out to the switched network? How many channels will be available for this service? It's my understanding that MSFT/WebTV are buying up Infomercial slots and reselling them with the proviso they must include WebTV content. There appear to me myriads of company's with plans for occupying cable spectrum. What do the providers intend to do. It looks like they want control of these new applications and the specifications for cable services. Seem's to me that the technical specs still are up in the air with lot's of companies trying to define them. The cart and the horse. If I were a provider would I choose and implement a new head-end system on the come? What comes first, the set-top PC or the head-end server? Seem's to me that's another reason the set-top PC has to be fully functional. Once the provider see's enough set-tops installed he may install the equipment to service them. Well, enough. Some day this will happen, there are enough companies trying to make it happen that it's probably a self fulfilling prophecy. I just don't think it will happen very soon.

To: Yousef who wrote (41633)	12/6/1997 12:30:00 PM
From: exhon2004	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Yousef: re <Intel not only has the best process technology and yield, but is also the lowest cost producer.> If Intel is the low-cost producer, which makes sense to me due to their better processes and higher volume, wouldn't a strategy of competing with the low cost producer on price be suicide? AMD might have been smarter to price higher than Intel and target that portion of the market that believes the K6 is superior to Intel's offering and thus worthy of a premium. As for Cyrix, it seems they are trying to compete on price, but at least have the semblance of a strategy by incorporating additional functions on the MP. Best Regards, Greg Gimelli