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: Paul Fiondella who wrote (63494)	8/27/1998 10:26:00 PM
From: Dale J.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul F, I happen to agree with you. Intel was on the right track. They had the opportunity to solidify their dominance by tying their chips to a base of software that would be under their own control. Whether the software would have been ultimately embedded in the chips as some sort of firmware or supplied as full software, it was critical that it belong to Intel. But instead they caved in. Why, because Bill Gates was livid. What a joke. Intel could have worked with the OEM's, most would have been happy to get out from under MSFT's thumb. Intel could have countered the "vague threat" with a threat of their own - to work more closely with IBM OS/2. I know OS/2 was a failure, but at the time OS/2 was still in the running. Besides Gates is paranoid and Intel could have played on those fears. I'm just speaking objectively. I am a MSFT shareholder and I admire Gates and his Microsurfs, but from a business standpoint that was a critical moment of failure for Intel. Dale