Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
>> My original position was that Intel was never "capacity constrained" in the sense that they did not have the Fab capacity, i.e. wafer start capacity, to meet demand. That capacity has always existed. The fact that Intel could not take full advantage of wafer start capacity is the reason for not being able to meet demand. I think that I have provided adequate support for that position. <<
Why is such a distinction pertinent for investors? Either way, it would seem that failure to meet demand in the past is not necessarily predictive of failure to meet demand in the future. Am I missing something?
From message 3286:
Well, one of our sources suggested that Intel is sacrificing yields… to get higher speed grades. Intel might be "heating up" the transistors which will result in faster parts, but the yields will be very low.
Can someone explain in plain English what “heating up the transistors” means in this context? How and why does that produce faster speeds but lower yields? T.i.a. Dew
Hi wsh. Glad to see you’re still around.
Today’s price action in TMTA is about right, IMO. The embedded stuff is nice but it’s not the key to profitability because the ASP’s are so low. We still need to launch the Astro on time and without a hitch. Regards, Dew
TMTA’s move into embedded processors has been expected because CEO Matt Perry’s background is in that area. However, I’m a little skeptical that the embedded market will be the main driver for TMTA to realize the revenue ramp needed for profitability because the embedded ASP’s are so darned low. The announced price for the new Crusoe SE processor is <$50 for the lowest-speed model running at 667MHz; no price has been given for the 800-933MHz models.
For TMTA, I consider the embedded market material but clearly subordinate to the laptop/tablet/UPC markets. TMTA’s success still hinges primarily on the 256-bit VLIW Astro CPU scheduled for volume shipments this summer. Dew
MIT develops next-generation OLED displays:
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/nr/2002/dot.html
>>
Quantum-dot LED may be screen of choice for future electronics
DECEMBER 18, 2002
CAMBRIDGE, Mass.—MIT researchers have combined organic materials with high-performing inorganic nanocrystals to create a hybrid optoelectronic structure—a quantum dot-organic light-emitting device (QD-OLED) that may one day replace liquid crystal displays (LCDs) as the flat-panel display of choice for consumer electronics.
The work, reported in the Dec. 19 issue of Nature, is a collaborative effort between Moungi G. Bawendi, professor of chemistry, and Vladimir Bulovic, assistant professor of electrical engineering and computer science. Bulovic is also affiliated with the Research Laboratory of Electronics.
Bawendi studies the electronic and optical properties of semiconductor nanocrystal quantum dots for applications ranging from biology to optical devices. Also called artificial atoms, quantum dots are nanometer-scale “boxes” that selectively hold or release electrons.
Unlike traditional LCDs, which must be lit from behind, quantum dots generate their own light. Depending on their size, the dots can be “tuned” to emit any color in the rainbow. And the colors of light they produce are much more saturated than that of other sources.
Bulovic is pursuing the use of organic and nanostructured materials as active electronic elements. Bawendi and Bulovic, with electrical engineering and computer science graduate student Seth A. Coe and chemistry graduate student Wing-Keung Woo, teamed up through MIT’s Center for Materials Science and Engineering (CMSE) to create a new, improved QD-OLED.
This latest MIT QD-OLED contains only a single layer of quantum dots sandwiched between two organic thin films. (Previous QD-OLEDs used 10-20 layers.) The researchers have demonstrated organized assemblies over a 1-square centimeter area and the same principle could be used to make bigger components.
The MIT team’s method of combining organic and inorganic materials may pave the way for new technologies and enhance understanding of the physics of these materials.
In addition to being used for extraordinarily thin, bright flat-panel displays, the QD-OLEDs also may be used in a variety of other applications; to calibrate wavelengths for scientific purposes, generate wavelengths visible only to robot eyes or “miniaturize scientific equipment in ways we haven’t yet imagined,” Bawendi said.
CREATING BRIGHT LIGHT
The QD-OLEDs created in the MIT study have a 25-fold improvement in luminescent power efficiency over previous QD-OLEDs. The MIT researchers note that in time, the devices may be made even more efficient and achieve even higher color saturation.
“One of the goals is to demonstrate a display that is stable, simple to produce, flat, high-resolution and that uses minimal power,” Bulovic said.
The MIT researchers were inspired by advances in all-organic LED (OLED) technology. OLEDs, which can be used to create TVs or computer screens only a fraction of an inch thick with the same brightness as LCDs, have been making their way into commercial electronic devices. The MIT group envisions that QD-OLEDs will in time become complementary to OLEDs because they can be built on the same electronic platforms with compatible manufacturing methods.
TINY BUILDING BLOCKS
While the future of electronics and other fields may revolve around nanotechnology, researchers and manufacturers are faced with fabricating large-scale components out of building blocks invisible to the naked eye.
Creating hybrid optoelectronic devices depends on the precise positioning of functionally distinct materials, the authors write. “How do you efficiently transport electrical charges to an active area of a hybrid device that is only a single layer of quantum dots?” Bawendi said.
The researchers used organic molecules currently used in OLEDs as an organic semiconductor to deliver an electrical charge to the quantum dots. They used two parallel processes, which are already widely applicable in industry, to create separate but layered structures out of nanoscale materials.
<<
If you are looking for a hedge for your INTC holding, TMTA might fit the bill better than AMD. wbmw owns some TMTA as a hedge so the idea can’t be crazy.
And I hate to bring it up again but you never responded to my proposed bet on TMTA vs INTC over the next two years. Regards, Dew
>> They have a fine Flash product line and even if processors don't turn out as they hype they can still possibly have a future <<
EP: was that: a) A typo; b) A Freudian slip; or c) Intentional?
You’ve been putting out some funny stuff lately. Regards, Dew
>> As for AMD, I learned long ago that there is always another sucker who is willing to take the place of the last guy who lost a bundle waiting for AMD to make it big… Some people just can't resist a loser. Kind of like the battered wife syndrome. <<
EP: You may be on to something there – that’s one of the few comments I’ve heard about battered wife syndrome that makes sense to me.
Over the years, your statement could have applied to some other famous tech names which had great technology but always seemed to end up a loser in every endeavor they tried. One that comes immediately to mind is Polaroid. FWIW. Dew
What time of day is the Happy Hour for free users? Is it the same schedule every day? t.i.a.
P.S. Access today has very slow. I guess you already know about that.
This could be fun:
My portfolio is up 5.3% today (as of 3:40EST, all but one position up).
If every day this year is just like today, 2003 will produce a return of 551,644%
wbmw: Fortunately, I did buy some in the mid 1’s when everyone was screaming “bankruptcy!” I knew from listening to the very detailed CC’s and reading the 10Q’s that GLW’s balance sheet was much better than most people thought. And that was before the sale of the precision lens division to 3M for $850M.
Regrettably, I am still in the red overall due to shares I bought in 2001. But recent trading has helped some: I sold 25% of my holding at 4.84 and bought it back at 3.25-3.32. I’ll continue to trade a portion and keep the bulk of the shares as a “core” tech holding.
I think the current price is a pretty safe entry point; multiple insiders including the CEO bought heavily between 3.00 and 3.50 in the past few months. Happy New Year. Dew
Another great post from the Yahoo MB:
http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=7080383&tid=glw&sid=7080383&...
GLW is my second-largest tech holding (after TMTA) and I expect great things from this company in the next 2-3 years.
Happy New Year.
>> With the ease that AMD issues these worthless bonds, I'd guess that Wall Street Investment Crooks can keep AMD propped up for another 2 or 3 years, issuing phony funny paper at regular intervals and letting their clients (Wall Street customers that purchase these worthless bonds) take the fall when the pyramid scheme ultimately collapses. <<
You overstate the case somewhat because most buyers of corporate bonds and convertible securities are relatively sophisticated institutional investors. The convertibles are often bought by arbitrageurs who short the common stock.
Don’t bother responding because I am leaving on vacation for a few days and I won’t have access to a computer.
Happy Holidays to all. Dew
SemiconEng: Thanks; much appreciated.
You’ve never heard anyone say, “my bad?” Perhaps your life has been too sheltered
SZ: my bad for saying DOJ instead of FTC. Do you or anyone else know the year of the most recent case? T.i.a.
Good find! I re-posted the article on the TMTA MB (Yahoo) and, as you might expect, it generated plenty of attention. One poster said essentially that, if AMD did not exist, INTC would have to create them in order to stay in the good graces of the antitrust cops.
BTW: does anyone remember exactly when INTC was found not guilty of monopolistic wrongdoing by the DOJ? T.i.a. Dew
Gross margins which are low by historical standards are already “priced in” to INTC’s stock now. For INTC to be a great short from its current level, industry-wide semiconductor volumes must remain flattish (or worse) for an extended period – in other words a protracted Semiconductor Nuclear Winter as predicted by Hseitz (ka-ching).
I thought about shorting INTC not too long ago but decided to pass. FWIW. Dew
[From the same Gilder article]:
>> They point out that the last four generations of chip geometries, 0.25 microns, 0.18 Microns, 0.13 microns, and now 0.09 microns…account for only 20% of chips made by the major foundries such as TSMC. <<
That’s a somewhat misleading stat. The newer-process chips account for a much higher percentage of foundries’ dollar sales than they do of their unit sales.
BTW: I have never been a fan of George Gilder. --Dew
> Mooly Eden's work on Banias and derivatives certainly earns him a place as a VP as far as I'm concerned. <<
wbmw: Do you know how many design engineers INTC has in Israel working for Eden’s group? I’d like to know approximately how many man-years of work went into Banias and affiliated products.
BTW: one follow-up question re INTC/AMD 130-->90nm transition: if other variables were constant (which I realize they aren’t), which do you think would be a riskier proposition: strained silicon or SOI? T.i.a. Dew
Intel Appoints 13 New Vice Presidents
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/021218/180249_1.html
“They are Sohail Ahmed, Robert Crooke, Scott Darling, Timothy Dunn, Shmuel (Mooly) Eden, Kirk Hasserjian, Gary Hensley, Cary Klafter, Gulzar Mohd Ali, James OHara, Sunil Shenoy, Jacklyn Sturm and Janice Wilkins.”
--
Thirteen new VP’s -- no wonder INTC’s margins have been shrinking
>> I went to the INTC board and there was alot of link posting etc., <<
cadpdivr: didn’t mean to imply that I dislike link posting; to the contrary, link posting is one of the most important uses for an investment-oriented message board.
But when you said, “a lot of link posting etc”, the “etc” should be part of the package. Naked link posting, without discussion or elaboration, can leave the impression that the material in the link is self-explanatory, which is often not the case. Regards, Dew
I regrettably concur; this MB has gone downhill and the timing seems to coincide with wbmw’s departure. Since then, this MB has been reduced to little more than link-posting, backslapping, and giggling.
I’ve been spending more time on the INTC MB. Although many posters over there are (as yet) reluctant to recognize TMTA’s promising future, there is some bona fide discussion of technology which is, on the whole, quite educational. FWIW. Dew
Bird: Michael Kanellos’ article uses ambiguous language; my interpretation is that:
“… the delay gives rivals extra time to convince PC makers to use their chips instead”
refers to the wireless chipset rivals – not the CPU rivals such as TMTA and AMD. Regards, Dew
With both XLNX and ALTR on 90nm by midyear, it could make for some tough decisions by application companies whether to go with programmable chips or custom chips.
>>…is the optimization the same? Is it simply a matter of threading or is there more to it for iHT? <<
EP: This article from last March is apropos. The author seems to agree with wbmw on the major points:
http://techupdate.zdnet.com/techupdate/stories/main/0,14179,2856825,00.html
Hyper-threading: Intel's call to action
By Larry Seltzer
March 20, 2002
I used to follow the processor business very closely and go to Microprocessor Forum, the premiere show in the industry, every year.
One of the arguments made by the hardware geniuses, although never very loudly, was that software people weren't doing enough to keep performance improving. Instead they were relying on CPU techniques like superscalar design and superpipelining and ever-bigger caches. If only programmers would start using more high-level parallelism in their programs, the argument goes, we could use more than one CPU at a time and systems would really start to boogie.
Intel has finally dared the software world with their new hyper-threading chips, first to make an appearance in new Xeon chips available by the end of the month. It's a smarter approach to an old idea from the same hardware geniuses I mentioned above: SMP-on-a-chip. A real dual-processor system is considerably more expensive, not least because it has two actual CPUs in it. The classic SMP-on-a-chip idea is to put two CPU cores on a single chip, but this still makes for an outrageously large and expensive chip. Hyper-threading works by keeping two (or more) processor states on the chip and having them share access to the functional units, such as the arithmetic logic unit. This makes the chip look like two processors to software, but at a much smaller cost in terms of precious chip real-estate.
To their credit, Intel has been very clear that hyper-threading does not a real dual-processor system make. After all, there's still one cache for them to share and one interface to the rest of the system. But programs that make actual use of that high-level parallelism I mentioned can run a lot faster on a hyper-threaded chip than on conventional designs. See Intel Technology Journal for a lot more on hyper-threading.
So the big question is whether the software business will take up the dare. On the server side I would argue that we're already there. Multiprocessor servers have become cheap and ubiquitous in recent years and Windows NT and Windows 2000 have supported them for a long time. More importantly, Windows has had APIs to facilitate the development of multithreaded server applications that keep them running optimally. I/O completion ports, for example, allow a server application to share a pool of threads with access to asynchronous I/O in a way that keeps the processors busy but minimizes context switching. Use of facilities like this is already well-established, at least among the better Windows server applications such as Microsoft's own IIS and SQL Server. The addition of Hyper-threading should improve performance of such applications considerably.
But not on your current operating systems. Microsoft announced in a recent paper on the subject that Windows .Net Server would support hyper-threading, but Windows 2000 and Windows NT are not written to take advantage of it. On the upside, you'll be relieved to read that Microsoft will not charge you for an extra CPU on your per-CPU licenses when you run their software on a hyper-threaded processor. How magnanimous.
On the desktop side, an inherently multitasking desktop operating system like Windows XP, which has scores of threads running even in a quiescent system, should experience an automatic performance boost from hyper-threading (Microsoft's Jim Allchin said that Windows XP takes advantage of Hyper-threading in a recent in-house interview). But the real payoff should come from multithreaded applications. Some applications do use multiple threads to good effect. The most conspicuous example is background printing in Microsoft Word. Or imagine--hypothetically--an image editing program that could render multiple images or multiple parts of a single image simultaneously.
Still, the desktop is a far tougher nut to crack, and several important factors argue against the widespread use:
· It will be many, many years before a large percentage of desktop systems use hyper-threaded processors; in the meantime, few desktops are multiprocessor.
· Most of the performance benefits of multithreading to desktop applications, on any type of processor, are in terms of responsiveness to the user, and are therefore difficult to measure accurately in a benchmark that can be run automatically and accurately.
· Multithreaded applications are often harder to write, and they introduce several new classes of bugs, generally having to do with different threads contending for access to common resources, that can make programs less reliable. For many developers, the benefits of multithreading may not win out over the new problems they create.
Actually, I'm pretty high on hyper-threading, but I think that, on the desktop, multithreading will only continue to creep in slowly over a long period of time. The better way for it to enter wider use is for it to be implemented behind the scenes by development tools and runtime facilities, such as garbage collection. Yet another example of us lazy programmers letting others do the hard work for us.
>> Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) and United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC) have started notifying customers earlier than expected that discounts on 0.25- and 0.35-micron processes will be cancelled by year-end…<<
TMTA uses TSM’s .13-micron process.
>> Foundry capacity is currently inexpensive due to a glut. If and when the economy turns around the prices are bound to go up.<<
TSM’s capacity utilization is running around 70%, so there is ample room for expansion at the foundry without racheting prices. I think it’s more likely there will be a drop in foundry prices before they go back up.
>> The existing products that they developed with some super high powered people in a hush-hush environment that was supposed to revolutionize the world... turned out to be a dud. <<
If Crusoe is such a dud, why did HP chose it for their Tablet PC? And why does every major Japanese PC vendor use Crusoe in at least part of their product line?
>> I think TMTA's best bet is that they get bought out for their IP. They are trading close enough to book value to make it a real possibility <<
That’s exactly why a buyout is highly unlikely, IMO. Please see msg #2705 on this board. Regards, Dew
>> Anybody can tilt the equation by giving their product away. TMTA loses money and likely always will. <<
EP: your view might make sense if TMTA had a zero or negative gross margin, as some young tech companies do. But in fact, TMTA’s gross margin is not bad. To be profitable, TMTA needs more volume to leverage the fixed costs (mainly R&D). The Compaq Tablet PC will help them get the volume up and Astro (the 256-bit VLIW successor to Crusoe due out 3Q03) should put TMTA in the black.
Now, how about that bet?
>> This isn't a revival meeting. Faith isn't the best basis for investing. TMTA will have to have a competitive product at a competitive price before they start fighting for design wins. <<
Have you not noticed? TMTA already has several design wins including the Compaq Tablet PC, which is considered the best Tablet PC on the market according to a majority of the many professional reviews I have read.
>>I'd prefer to wait for signs of a marketable product before being born again...<<
Tell you what, EP: I’ll bet you a lifetime membership on iHUB that TMTA’s stock has a better % return than INTC’s, measured from today’s closing price to the closing price on 12/31/04.
Are you game?
>> Can you show that TMTA can field a product that Intel can't match? <<
EP: that’s a pretty tall order
Seriously, that’s why we have a stock market: some folks believe, others don’t.
I have a pretty decent track record over the years and TMTA is the largest tech holding I have ever had. So I guess you could say that I believe. Regards, Dew
Fingolfen, EP, et al:
The fab vs fabless argument cuts both ways:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=499380
Performance matters, of course. But performance is not the only thing that matters. Some of the other things that matter are: form factor, power consumption, heat, and price. For many users, one or more of these attributes outweighs raw performance when making a purchasing decision.
I won’t go into the details of TMTA’s present and planned designs because this has been covered in some prior messages on this MB (as well as the TMTA MB). I’ll be happy to point to specific message numbers if you are interested. Regards, Dew
>> Grove's speech describes a problem that the entire industry is facing, including TMTA. <<
wbmw: Very true, but TMTA is one of the few companies that will prosper because of the industry’s heat/power problem – not merely in spite of it. Regards, Dew
>> Speaking metaphorically, Mr. Grove said that "in our headlong pursuit of performance . . . we are heading toward a nuclear reactor" in terms of electrical current consumed by chips. <<
I find the “speaking metaphorically” qualifier added by the Dow Jones author to be amusing. With the populace on edge these days, we certainly wouldn’t want anyone to think we were talking about a real nuclear meltdown (lol).
FWIW: I think Grove’s speech is an implicit endorsement of TMTA’s vision. Dew
An answer to dumb PC salespeople:
[This article should resonate with those of us who have spent any time in computer stores lately. Some excerpts follow]:
http://zdnet.com.com/2102-1107-976326.html
>>
Just like every other red-blooded American with a job this time of the year, I've been out shopping of late. As my wife will attest, I relish this seasonal rite as much as I do an extended root canal. But there are gift lists to fill and, as my president says, it's the patriotic thing to do.
It so happened that I found myself in the market for a PC and a personal digital assistant. If I could pick up a bargain in the process, so much the better, but all I really wanted was to get in and out with a minimum of fuss while making sure the salesman didn't con me into buying a lemon.
But on visits to retail stores on both the East Coast and West Coast, it was the same depressing story: The salespeople may have been scrubbed, cheerful and polite--but they were utterly incompetent when it came to explaining the ins and outs of the products they were selling or the underlying technologies. Even worse, they pretended they really knew what they were talking about.
On Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, I got a first taste of what I was up against on a visit to a consumer-electronics chain advertising a too-good-to-be-true deal. Asked to explain the difference between a couple of computer systems that struck my fancy, an eager salesman who had attached himself to me declared that configuration A was preferable because "it had more storage and that is good, especially if you want to store files in a computer."
But now congenital mall-haters such as me no longer have to grin and bear it. We have an option--and it's only a single keystroke away.
<<
Hiawatha Bray is one of my favorite tech writers. Too bad this article just repeats the conventional wisdom about TMTA’s performance, the arrival of Banias, etc. Not one of Bray’s better jobs, IMO.
An especially good post from the Yahoo MB:
http://post.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=0&board=7080383&tid=glw&sid=7080383&mid=10...
(OT) I’m curious how many regulars on this MB follow Solectron and what their opinions are. The CEO recently made a big purchase.