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: Steve Porter who wrote (58811)	6/26/1998 4:44:00 AM
From: Gerald Walls	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Gerald, How convenient that you try and read between the lines and forget the important stuff.. Did I ever say AMD would make money or improve yields in that post... I don't think so. Did I ever say that Segas or Nintendos were the only answer NO. I was only saying that they are competition. If AMD makes the best chip in the world in tiny quantities, who cares? For them to be a serious competitor they must improve their yields, right? As far as Segas, Nintendos and Sonys go, you used them to trivialize the need for additional processing power for game playing by implying that a high-end gamer wouldn't use a P-II because higher-performance alternatives exist. Geeze some of you INtel people really live in a close world, seeming to think that everything has to be your way. Kinda sounds like the Romans, Greeks, etc. Ad hominem. Did I say people won't play games on a PII. NOPE. I just said there were other alternatives, some of which ofter a better price/performance ratio. So? The added utility of General Purpose computer vs. a dedicated game machine changes that equation. Either adjust performance to reflect the added utility or proportion the price between game/non-game applications. And I note how you COMPLETELY IGNORED my statements about video cards and the like.. very convenient. Did you look at the reviews at the Tom's Hardware site? It's more than just frame rate. It's also resolution. Or are you referring to your prediction that the CPU will eventually be the IO/interrupt handler for all the $pecial board$ plugged into the system? Why do you ignore the fact that no matter how fast a processor has been in the past that in just a couple of years it's considered slow and obsolete? I remember how that 386-33 was such a screamer! How could anyone need more? How about that awesome Pentium-66! Software always eventually expands to fit the hardware available. It always has and always will. Just because we can't imagine what it will be doesn't mean it won't happen. It just means that those who can imagine it will make a lot of money. You seem to be saying that we're in a New Era of computing and processors are now so fast that there's nothing that anyone can ever do that will eat all that computing power. Ha! Twenty years from now kids won't even recognize what we have as computers and we'll look back at them with the same fondness that our parents have towards their old Philco radios. We're at the very beginning of the computer era, not the end. Boy I wish I could be as closed minded as some of you folks, it sure would make life a lot simpler. Another ad hominem, but I'll return this one: You already are, just on the opposing side.