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: Paul Engel who wrote (43743)	1/3/1998 8:02:00 PM
From: stak	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Stak - rE: "CPU DEVELOPMENT WILL GET MORE AND MORE COSTLY TO BRING TO MARKET.SOFTWARE AND O/S DEVELOPMENT WILL COST MORE BUT NOT PROHIBITIVELY SO." >>This isn't pertinent.<<< Respectfully strongly disagree. cost of development is a factor for any business in the tech industry. >>> Now think of this - Windows 95 rolled out in August 1995. Windows NT v. 4 rolled out in late 1996. No major O/S releases SINCE THEN! In Novemmber, 1995, Intel rolled out the Pentium Pro. In January, 1997 Intel introduced the Pentium MMX In May, 1997 Introduced the Pentium II In July 1997, Intel introduced the Pentium Pro with 1 MegaByte integrated L2 Cache In September 1997, Intel introduced the low power 0.25 micron Tillamook for notebooks. In September 1997, Intel introduced the 440LX chip set to support the AGP In November, Intel introduced StratFlash, a new Flash technology capable of doubling non-volatile strogae density. In 9 days, Intel will introduce a 266 MHz Tillamook. At the end if January, Intel will introduce a 333 MHz Pentium II At the end of February, Intel will introduce a 350 MHz and 400 Deschutes. In the same time frame, Intel will introduce a 100 MHz 440BX chip set and the i740 3D AGP graphics accelerator. And what has Microsoft squirted out in this time frame?<<< CONCLUSION - it may cost Microsoft LESS to roll out new software, but INTEL is more effective at technology introductions DESPITE their higher costs. Intel spends their money MUCH BETTER than Microsoft.<<< Thankyou for showing my point so clearly. Intel has been running faster than ever to stay on top.but the faster they run the faster they come up against the wall. Microsoft on the other hand has been very quiet,in your view. I agree with you on that point but MSFT has been hugely successful in the last few years on the QTRly bottom line. Does MSFT have competition the way Intel has? >>>CONCLUSION - it may cost Microsoft LESS to roll out new software, but INTEL is more effective at technology introductions DESPITE their higher costs. Intel spends their money MUCH BETTER than Microsoft.<<< anybody else have opinions on who spends or invests money better?