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: Mary Cluney who wrote (43778)	1/3/1998 10:15:00 PM
From: Jay	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Mary Re "let the hardware do the work." Just like the disk drives do their work?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (43778)	1/6/1998 7:17:00 PM
From: stak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

>>Why write efficient, elegant code when you don't have to. That is very, very expensive. In this, Stak has got it right. MSFT has figured it out - let the hardware do the work. << Yes! But it's not me that has it right it's Microsoft that has it figured out. As Paul pointed out in one of his posts to me .Intel's accomplishments look much more impressive than Microsoft's,starting from the Aug/95 time frame. It is not in Microsoft's best interests to push the envelop of software development to the leading edge where the cpu is fully taxed out. WHY? Because for example in 95 when WIN95 was intro-ed the cpu and RAM memory were being used close to their max in many cases.(slow performance). Particularly when Netscape's browser became popular. People blames the O/S not the hardware(probably rightly so). But if Microsoft keeps the O/S behind the leading edge of cpu advances then people would not concentrate on getting hardware(cpu,RAM) upgrades to make their computer work acceptably. Microsoft can take their time bringing out the upgrades.They can get from A to B in a leisure pace and not even break a sweat while pulling in fantastic profits. Intel on the other hand has been going at 150 miles per hour with the very impressive debut of all the Pentium chips. Intel still pulls in great profits but people get 'down' on them. why? THERE'S NO REASON. So Intel brings a much better product out frequently and quickly plus they drastically reduce the price regularly. Microsoft on the other hand brings out a better product every few years and charges the same price. Extrapolate this out and it's obvious that at some point Intel will not be able to keep the pace. That's why Microsoft keeps the development of software relatively slow. Purely, it's REALLY not in their best interest. Who's there to push MSFT to hurry up. Nobody, no competition is strong enough. That's why the IA-64 is a good chance to tilt the balance in Intel's favor. Mary how viable is a non-WINx O/S for IA-64 for the at home pc user? What could Intel do along this line?