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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (8044)	3/5/1998 8:02:00 PM
From: xiangheng xu	Respond to of 64865

Here is a more positive spin on the market biz.yahoo.com

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (8044)	3/5/1998 9:21:00 PM
From: Charles Tutt	Respond to of 64865

I'm not sure it's the case, either, but I'm also not willing to necessarily rule it out. After the holidays, I think the mix of buyers turns towards businesses from individuals. Businesses may be evaluating the NC alternative and holding off on big commitments to PC's until that evaluation is done. JMHO.

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (8044)	3/6/1998 4:31:00 PM
From: cheryl williamson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Frank, You make some good points. Regarding the inventory/seasonal explanation: My take is that INTC is used to having a flat Q1 after the Xmas season, but this one (as they predict) will not be flat, but will have a 10% shortfall. Something else may well be affecting their bottom line. I've heard that INTC blames it on a lagging demand for PC's. Yeah, right, that makes sense, but what does that really mean? If we split the PC market into business & home users & look at business for the moment, I think a case can be made for the NC. Think back just a couple of years (or so) ago and you'll remember a steadily increasing shift in PC's to more & more powerful (and expensive) units. Intel's margins depend on higher-end machines and everyone in the PC business began touting their ability to do "the same tasks as Unix-based workstations, only much cheaper". I didn't hear one peep about sub-$1000 PC's or even sub-$1500 PC's with reduced capabilities as an option anyone was pursuing. Then Larry (the mouth) Ellison comes out with a great, new idea: a Network Computer that will cost < $1000 & have $0 in admin costs. The possibility of a cheap, thin client doing PC tasks for < $1000 shocked the hell out of Andy Groves (Mr. paranoid himself). After all, the technology already here and they can be produced for peanuts, compared to expensive Pentium-based PC's. Intel & co. had to have an answer for it. Bill (the idiot) Gates came up with his usual pointless & useless specs for low-admin PC's, NetPC's, & Windows terminals while HP and others began proposing cheaper & cheaper PC's. Voila, here it is, 1997-98 & we see sub-$1000 PC's. Now, the business market for these PC's is red-hot - and the margins for INTC are low, low, low. Maybe that's why they announced that they are renewing their commitment to the high-end market & are going to re-double their efforts for Merced etal... My theory is that IT managers don't care about excess capacity, memory, and high-speed cpus. They have thousands of employees who run stupid, slow, interactive applications every day & just want something cheap that will get the job done. If they decide to buy a PC & not an NC, because they just love to give BG & co. more & more money, that doesn't mean that it wasn't because of the NC that cheap PCs came about. NC's have brought about a price war in computer hardware & the PC makers are going to take it on the chin. The home market, however, is a different ballgame. I don't see much impact from the NC there. Marketing cheap PC's to home users probably won't make much of a difference, except for those who have not been in the market for a computer because of price. The real problem with capturing the other 60% of households that do not own or use computers has to do with ease-of-use. That is probably why TCI is coming out with their set-top boxes. I believe, strongly, that hardware is a commodity. You pretty much get what you pay for. We are now seeing what happens when PC makers bring their prices down too far. Sure, it's great to advertise an inexpensive, powerful machine, but there has to be a viable profit margin in every unit sold, otherwise, if demand drops, even just a little, your earnings are in the tank. cheers, cherylw