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: Barry A. Watzman who wrote (49537)	3/5/1998 12:10:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 186894

<Merced is not playing catch up, Alpha is not competition.> Merced is not born yet, and it will be born dead, IMHO. Alpha does exist NOW, so it is a really foolish statement: not yet born baby is competing with a mature product. Ha. <The issue is not raw CPU performance, it is compatability with the installed base and ongoing industry-wide support.> I somehow do not recall any shrink-wrapped Merced application in local shops yet. If you mean the dual-instruction capabilities, then do not make me laugh. The Merced is a coffin for Intel, it is obvious for any CS. iAPX432 story will repeat itself, bookmark this post.

To: Barry A. Watzman who wrote (49537)	3/5/1998 10:38:00 AM
From: Beachbumm	Respond to of 186894

Clearly, DEC couldn't position Alpha. Mgmt just ran that show into the ground. But I well remember the mid 80s when DEC meant high performance computing. It will be interesting to see what CPQ does with it. As for writing the epitaph on Sparc, no way. I note that it is INTC that is warning the street, not SUNW. It has been speculated on the SUNW thread that Darwin may be partly responsible. In other words, is INTC's problem really that it doesn't have a low cost pc chip or that its higher performance (higher margin) chips have significant competition? Just my humble observations. Beachbumm