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: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (56593)	4/27/1999 4:41:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575780

Loco Kevin - Re: " No, he didn't. I think it's pretty clear from his statement t " Wow ! Now you get to WHINE about Scumbria's mistakes as well as your own ! Keep up the whining ! Maybe it will make you feel better ! Paul

To: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (56593)	4/27/1999 6:12:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1575780

Why is it IF_Merced? I think the better term would be IF_IA-64, because even if Merced is off the performance scale, the lack of native software will be the biggest issue. That's one reason why Intel is hoping that McKinley, and Madison shortly after that, will really take IA-64 to new levels. Also, Intel is waiting until Deerfield before introducing IA-64 into the high-end desktop, not because Intel can't do one before then, but because it wouldn't make sense until a critical mass of software has been written. All this talk about whether Merced will be successful or not is very, very short sighted compared with Intel's long-term hopes for IA-64. Oh, whoops, I meant IF_IA-64. Tenchusatsu