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 : IBM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: George W Daly, Jr. who wrote (4258)	11/17/1998 4:51:00 PM
From: J R KARY	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8218

Did the PowerPC meet its original objective of OS independence ? Hi George . HWP expected a lot from INTC's Merced chip and now disappointed is relying on the Mc Kinley chip after year 2002 . I found this PowerPC objective in a news item on HWP's follies: >> " A bigger problem was the looming threat of PowerPC, a RISC architecture announced by IBM (NYSE:IBM), Motorola Inc. (NYSE:MOT) and Apple Computer Inc. (Nasdaq:AAPL) in October 1991. At its conception, PowerPC posed a major potential challenge to Intel, since it was being designed to run Windows NT, Unix and Macintosh operating systems. "The [PowerPC] project had everyone's attention," said a source who was closely involved in the HP negotiations for Intel. "[Intel and HP] had a common foe in terms of a new RISC architecture." dailynews.yahoo.com In a pre-1991 taskforce to define the PowerPC an objective was AS/400 - DOS concurrent file processing in addition to the above OSs . The PowerPC project was spearheaded by then CEO Mr John Akers . Has IBM 1998 achieved the original PowerPC concurrent OS/File processing objective ? TIA Regards, Jim K.

To: George W Daly, Jr. who wrote (4258)	11/17/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: Jules B. Garfunkel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8218

Thanks George for your intelligent reply to my questions. You make sense, but will IBM be able to bring on Internet revenues fast enough to compensate for their inability to buy back as many shares of stock, (because of the higher price now), or their inability to get tax rates any lower than they are now? Don't you think the absence of both of these positive contributors to earnings in the past, now occurring simultaneously, will put a strain on earnings comparisons going forward?. Jules