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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gopher Broke who wrote (55007)	4/9/1999 6:50:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1582531

<So, what I anticipate is not that AMD moves out of supplying the sub-$1000 PC category, but that Intel is increasingly forced down into it. We (as consumers) will do well.> Don't you get it, though? This is an increasingly self-destructive path for AMD. Compaq's warning today is a sure sign that the sub-$1000 PC market that they and AMD helped to create is also the same market that both companies are losing money in. What benefit does AMD enjoy by bringing Intel further into the sub-$1000 market? Sure, they'll damage Intel's profitability, but this will be at the expense of AMD's own survival. And of course customers make out like a bandit in this sort of market. But I haven't seen any strategy from AMD which outlines how they will lower costs and start making a profit in the sub-$1000 sector, their home turf. Instead, we keep hearing how AMD with their K7 will force Intel to charge Celeron-like prices on the Pentium III and the Xeon. That's nice for the consumer, but it says nothing about any long-term money-making strategy for AMD. So as usual, AMD is still trying to bloody Intel's fist with its own face. They're only hoping that the K7 will serve as a hockey mask, but they don't realize that Intel has the hands of stone. Tenchusatsu

To: Gopher Broke who wrote (55007)	4/10/1999 2:35:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1582531

Gopher Brain - Re: " When a competitor emerges that can compete in all processor performance categories (no I am not saying this is necessarily AMD, Mr Engel, so hold the sarcasm) and we see true price competition, rather than the rather skewed competition we are seeing at present, then it is inevitable that all models or processor will come down in price substantially." True price competition ? Look at AMD's success in TRUE PRICE competition. They are HEMMORAGING MONEY. Cluesless folks like you think that any old person can design and fabricate CPUs with 20 million + transistors using only their saved up lunch money. Wake up. These CPUs cost Hundreds of millions of dollars to design and each fabrication plant costs several BILLION dollars to construct. And just c constructing them doesn't mean they are going to work properly - witness AMD's humongous losses. Companies that make these investments don't do it because cheap clueless guys like you want all computers to be free but willingly spend $38,000 on a new car. Intel is successful because they understand they are in BUSINESS to make money, not to run a welfare state for cheap whinies like you. Paul