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 : CHPS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter who wrote (2582)	12/21/1997 6:24:00 PM
From: Willie Lew	Respond to of 2740

Peter, I think INTC will eventually integrated the video in their newer CPUs in the future...that is why they are buying CHPS. or they plan to come out with a video chips what is standardized with their CPU. Willie >> Also, there is an analogy here...sort of anyway....look a MSFT....and their problems.....They are number 1 with operating system...like INTC is with chips....and the FTC doesn't like the way they bundle a web browser they aren't number 1 in.....Maybe the FTC doesn't want INTC to become #1 in the graphics area????? This explains their hesitation....regardless of CHPS competition....and why CHPS competitors are probably complaining loudly! I am not so sure this is a done deal at all!

To: Peter who wrote (2582)	12/22/1997 9:33:00 AM
From: Timoteo	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2740

Peter, I was thinking of the MSFT deal to, but don't believe the analogy is that strong. MSFT's os is necessary to run most of the software on the market (certainly a monopolistic proposition). In its current configuration, "requiring" the use of Explorer is arguably an anti-competitive process. I think justice will have a much harder time once the browser is seamlessly integrated. Same argument for any other capabilities like voice recognition. MSFT already includes accessories in its os so where do you draw the line. INTC on the other hand possesses key technology (MMX licensing for example) but the horizontal integration into video chips is not itself anti-competitive. If INTC required the use of their video chips, there might be an argument. If it is integrated, like the cyrix chip, there is that gray area again. The big difference is that the consumer does not "need" INTC for anything; AMD and Cyrix will do just fine. Timoteo