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: Maverick who wrote (53693)	4/16/1998 9:09:00 PM
From: AlanH	Respond to of 186894

Maverick, thx for the Dataquest piece. Did you note the last paragraph... Brookwood said most of the worldwide microprocessor revenue growth in 1998 would come from sales of chips for high-end desktop machines, known as workstations, or for servers, the special computers that handle the flow of information through computer networks. This sounds very much like the tech shift that INTC has underway. In my estimation, INTC has relinquished the low-end. (Recall the exodus from memory some years ago?) In this case, Celeron performance is far less significant. Celeron becomes the loss-leader in a branding play toward top-to-bottom engineering, business products. BTW, if you believe 400Mhz app requirements are scarce, ask: a) designers of P (or, K)chips, autos, airplanes, etc; b) imaging folks in seismic, defense, research, animation, medicine; c) IT managers with explosive data growth; and/or, d) the people who enable today's trading floors.

To: Maverick who wrote (53693)	4/16/1998 11:56:00 PM
From: blankmind	Respond to of 186894

Intel will lose market share in 1998 because its chips are more expensive than its rivals - maverick this logic does not work, just because the competitors chips cost less, does not mean intc will lose market share. why? 1. brand loyalty. 2. price diff is not huge 3. intel has a marketing machine 4. businesses/consumers are reluctant to purchase off-brand names. ko would be out of business using this logic, yet they sell more each year.

To: Maverick who wrote (53693)	4/17/1998 9:19:00 PM
From: pete_farmer	Respond to of 186894

Re: Loss of market share------ Thanks for the input; there is no substitute for data. My response was wiped out by a flaky local server. Which brings me back to the point. Reliability was, the gist of my previous note. A PC is not a VCR. Once I get all the software loaded and organized on a newly bought PC, I do not want to find limitations or problems. I am will to pay more for the perceived comfort in purchasing an Intel machine with the latest options. I am sure companies like National Semi currently make reliable chips. I still remember, however, when they didn't. Invariably, in the early days, when we build computers using the then cheaper National Semi chips, they failed. Intel chips always worked. If AMD is having yield problems, Im not comfortable investing significant money in a machine that may wipe out prized data. Thanks again for the input.