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 : 3DFX -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter S. who wrote (9113)	11/20/1998 12:34:00 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Respond to of 16960

If 3Dfx had ?bitten the bullet' and had gone for 24/32 bit rendering then they might, just might have been justified in calling the new product Voodoo3 I tend to agree. This product should have been called Banshee2 and then it would have been praised. The problem as I've been saying for sometime now, is that 3Dfx is not good at marketing. This is what I think has happend: Initially 3Dfx wanted to make a host of products with cool names Voodoo, Banshee, ... Then they realized that the general public may be too dumb to associate more than one name to the same company and product, BUT they had already publicized Banshee. So they did the best save they could, by calling it Voodoo Banshee and decided that from now on, anything they make will have the name Voodoo before it. So gone was Banshee2, in was Voodoo3. I think a case could be made for maintaining two sets of names, Voodoo for the high end, and Banshee for the "low" end. Even so, it is probably better to go with the Voodoo3 name. The marketting challange here is to start naming the high end products in such a way that is associated with the Voodoo line but is still distinguishes the high end from the low end. The real Voodoo3 should be better than Banshee3 even though Banshee3 will come out later. Sun Tzu