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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Engel who wrote (36838)	11/19/1998 12:35:00 AM
From: Amir Shalit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Paul, can you give me one example of a single non-tech company that will benefit from replacing P100 PCs with PII-450Mhz. What really matters are the apps that you run on your PC and most of the important stuff is running on servers, not desktops. BTW, top servers are not "Intel Inside" but rather IBM/SUN/Compaq-DEC inside.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (36838)	11/19/1998 9:23:00 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

paul, do you know of any companies that have said, "we have a lot of cobol and can't fix it. get rid of all cobol, get new software and buy new boxes?" if that is actually what occurs en masse then intel and msft may do well. as for a secretary with a pii400 vs a p200, you gave a nice rally cry and that was pretty good marketing - sounded good but you gave no substance. a pii400 doesn't allow an office assistant to type or enter data any faster. this is the time consuming part of their office work. sure, they can start netscape faster... but can't really surf faster. my p133 laptop which is lower than p133 desktop, is just as fast surfin' the net as my pii300 desktop. design engineers and the like would do well with a faster machine and may have a competitive advantage by having one. this is a small % of the market. many, many, many people do not. employee ego does fit in... ie, i want a fast box to be cool and say i have it. that is why i put in the caveat about rational cost/benefit analysis. i do appreciate the substance you've now decided to put forth in your posts. it sparks discussion. you just had to fit that tail light comment in, huh? ;-) tia...