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: Thomas M. who wrote (57540)	5/7/1999 12:21:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571473

Thomas M. - < Stop spouting the company line. You don't want to sound like a corporate schil, do you? If this statement were true, why would so many IT pros be switching to the legendarily unreliable Windows NT from Unix? > OK, so what's your argument? That IT is going to flock to the K7 because it doesn't have the RAS and brand recognition that Intel /Xeon has? Please continue with your argument. FYI, Xeon works great on UNIX platforms too. Here is a recent article that outlines the K7 push into the market your talking about. news.com Note the following statements by Gwenapp, not an Intel company schill: "Getting there won't be easy. Testing and qualifying processors and chipsets for multiprocessing environments remains a technically arduous and expensive process requiring massive resources and blocks of time, said Gwennap. Manufacturers and customers are highly brand conscious. "It's one thing if your PC crashes. It's another if your $200,000 server crashes," he said. "Even if they can qualify the K7 for multiprocessor environments, it is going to be hard to get traction because of the brand preference." Nonetheless, if AMD can break through, it would find itself in a lucrative market. Volumes are small for server chips, "but the server market is where all the growth is," said Gwennap." I believe Ten's argument runs somewhat along these lines. PB

To: Thomas M. who wrote (57540)	5/7/1999 12:31:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571473

<If this statement were true, why would so many IT pros be switching to the legendarily unreliable Windows NT from Unix?> I asked some coworkers the same question, because at first it sounded counterproductive to me. The switch from UNIX to Windows NT goes along the same lines as the switch from RISC to Xeon. Xeon is a huge price/performance advantage over RISC workstations. The only thing RISC brings now to the table is experience when it comes to RAS. The big RISC boys have been in this game for quite a while, and Xeon is just a newcomer in comparison. Now I don't know how unreliable NT can be when it comes to enterprise servers, but Paul posted a link yesterday which shows that Nasdaq just ordered a bunch of Unisys NT systems based on Pentium III Xeon: newsalert.com So if Nasdaq entrusts their critical operations to run on Windows NT, I guess that says a lot about the RAS of the oft-criticized operating system. Tenchusatsu