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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: charles moore who wrote (27185)	12/26/1997 7:02:00 PM
From: Kashish King	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573075

The average consumer is looking for the most capacity and the most speed. Armed with the basic assumption that more is better, the average Joe should be reasonably well protected. There are plenty of magazines available, too. Having said that, it can be very confusing and more needs to be done to ease the decision making process for such a major expense. I know that press talks about sub-$1000 PCs like that's pocket change and it's certainly not the case for the average family. As for the SX issue, as a practical matter you really did not need that extra floating point power back then unless you had some large spreadsheet computation. To some extent, a lot of this is psychological. The reason I bought Matrox Mystique cards for $99 was not because I could not afford a high-end card; it was because that card blows away anything I have ever owned. At some point good enough is good enough and I saw no reason to spend more when my needs were more than adequately satisfied with that card. We are definitely not there in terms of the CPU speed however. Both my K6 and Pentium systems have been slayed by new Microsoft bloatware.

To: charles moore who wrote (27185)	12/26/1997 8:11:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573075

Charles - Re: "Either Intel was not "forward looking" or they were just trying to "rip people off". Now, now, now! Many of the AMD apologists explain that Intel's FPU advantages in their Pentium and Pentium II over the K6 are "irrelevant" since most people don't use much software that makes use of the FPU. Intel saw this 6 years ago and offered a lower cost 486 without the FPU - A LOWER COST DEVICE. They were targeting the SX to lower cost systems - are you not familiar with ther term MARKETING? The SX wasn't a major success and Intel realized that perhaps FPU performance WAS CRITICAL! So, now they offer it across their product line. And you may wonder if this has had an impact on Intel's Pentium sales being higher than the K6! And you use this faux pas as a chance to blame Intel for a personal mistake. Yes, charles - you are a victim - you have been victimized - through no fault of your own. Your problems can all be laid at the foot of the evil empire - not your own oversight. Paul