SI
SI
discoversearch

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
Intel Corporation (INTC)
An SI Board Since October 1995
Posts SubjectMarks Bans Symbol
186894 739 0 INTC
Emcee:  SI (no user) Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Market Data Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
185744Intel Receives FDA Market Clearance on In-Home Medical Device for Management of JakeStraw-7/10/2008
185743Intel shreks AMD fool.comdr_elis-7/8/2008
185742Intel D2 will stay open to make chipsets at 130nm using 861 process. This was angugie-6/30/2008
185741Ok, whatever.Elmer Phud-6/30/2008
185740He's naturally averse to high tech companies as he admits he doesn't undmas_-6/30/2008
185739<i>the Dhabians may like the tradeoffs and obviously can write off the casElmer Phud-6/30/2008
185738You make good points but failure is not a guaranteed outcome and all investmentsmas_-6/30/2008
185737<i>What's stupid about buying shares cheaply of a twin Fab high-tech bElmer Phud-6/29/2008
185736What's stupid about buying shares cheaply of a twin Fab high-tech business ?mas_-6/29/2008
185735<i>How poor do you think Abu Dhabi is ?</i> They're quite rich,Elmer Phud-6/29/2008
185734How poor do you think Abu Dhabi is ? ;-) Sarmad's right, AMD have found the mas_-6/29/2008
185733While it's true there's a sucker born every minute, they're not neceElmer Phud-6/25/2008
185732>> A mighty difficult thing to do when you have inferior products and highSarmad Y. Hermiz-6/25/2008
185731>> Or perhaps you just saw them on the same page with O'Melveny. TheySarmad Y. Hermiz-6/25/2008
185730<i>My point is that I think the law suit of AMD vs Intel was filed to makeElmer Phud-6/25/2008
185729It may well be that the Supreme Court denied cert in the LePage case because theThe Duke of URL©-6/25/2008
185728I have not heard those statements before, and I have heard all the statements. The Duke of URL©-6/25/2008
185727>> There are significant differences from the LePage-3M case. if you haveSarmad Y. Hermiz-6/25/2008
185726>> O'Melveny is not listed as attorney of record. I was mistaken abouSarmad Y. Hermiz-6/24/2008
185725>> I asked you what suit Henri Richard was associated with before he came Sarmad Y. Hermiz-6/24/2008
185724There are significant differences from the LePage-3M case. A. 3M tied together Saturn V-6/24/2008
185723I just skimmed that case, <u>LePage's v. 3M</u>, and it is a VERThe Duke of URL©-6/24/2008
185722Let me be clear. I asked you what suit Henri Richard was associated with beforeThe Duke of URL©-6/24/2008
185721>> what case? did Henri have to do with? I think AMD's suit was filedSarmad Y. Hermiz-6/24/2008
185720what case? did Henri have to do with? Also, there are 3 separate issues allegedThe Duke of URL©-6/24/2008
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News