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.
Looks like I should have sold those calls. EOM
wbmw
Looks Like I Should Have Bet....
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1067309
Semi
Semi, EP, Jerry,
Dan3 was around when PE, Usef, EP, Tim and a few other had some bitter exchanges. My feelings at the time were embittered toward some of the Intel croud. I was just a lurker then.
Following the personalalities for a while I could see some of the things that would offend one person might bounce of another. Maybe 'knowing' a person before hand, I know what to expect if I jib now. No one is pure in these debates. Please try to see through another's eyes. You may learn if you can. </soapbox>
Someday you might look back at Darbes, Niceguy, Ali and the rest and remember the good old days.<//soapbox>
No offense intended, but I guess these boards don't have as big an impact on my life, nor are they as big a part of my life as they obviously are, for some other people's lives. My life is too full for that. I think that someday when I look back on "The Good Old Days", these boards, much less the people, won't even come to mind.
To each their own I guess.
Semi
And as for Dan3, why don't you (and everybody else for that matter) just put him on ignore?
Because..... I have to admit, that sometimes his delusions make me LMAO, and in my line of work, on occasion, I could really use a laugh. I can't help it, I sometimes find Dan's denial in the face of overwhelming evidence, amusing. There's something to be said for the entertainment value, as long as I remind myself not to take him seriously, and respond. Sometimes, though, I just can't resist.
Semi
wbmw, yes, P4 has a legitimate win in SuperPi now, with a few caveats to at least consider for the real world.
Paul, Of course we all know that Super Pi has little to do with the real world. The whole point of the posts was to make fun of Dan. I admit, it was a bit cruel, but in the past, Dan has trumpeted Super Pi as the ultimate in benchmarks to show performance...... He pounded the intel fans with it for months. Of course, that was when Athlon was leading in that benchmark, and no amount of LOGICAL "Real World" argument at the time would even budge his position. So I hope that you can forgive us poor intelevangilistas, the jibes at him now, since he has become strangly silent about this benchmark, now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Semi
Semi, thanks for the clarification! Now, are there any examples of wafers where adjoining rows of devices are skewed to better take advantage of edge space on the (roughly) circular disk?
Die are positioned on the wafers to maximize the total number of complete die on a wafer. There may also be a consideration of the time it takes for the Litho Stepper to move to the next row/die. Moving straight down/up to the next complete die on the next row, takes a shorter amount of time than moving straight up/down and also 1/2 stepping over. Also as was previously stated, wafer saw would be much easier/quicker/cheaper with all the die aligned.
I don't know if ofset rows/die on wafers can be done. I haven't personally seen any wafers with offset die row/row. Maybe such wafers exist, but I haven't seen any in my work in the past 10 years.
Semi
There may be a similar requirement in the etching phase, too.
FYI - Die Pattern is not an issue for Etch, as the entire wafer is etched simultaneously.
Regards,
Semi
Dan, watching you return to attacking the benchmark is a completely predictable behavior for you, now that 95% of reviews agree that Intel is firmly in the lead. Maybe they should just all be running Worldbench 4 and Super Pi. Those are the *real* benchmarks, right Dan3?
wbmw
Super PI...... Ummmm No..... Regardless of Dan's long history of trumpeting Super Pi as the know all, and be all, for measuring performance, Dan hasn't mentioned it for awhile now, and I have a feeling that Dan no longer believes that Super Pi is the holy grail of benchmarking. Why........? It's obvious........
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1403&page=3
Semi
There are still some magazines that run their own test, instead of the one Intel puts together and tells them to run.
Gee Dan, I wonder why you're not trumping the Value of the "Super Pi" Benchmark test like you did in the past, since this was a previous favorite "Benchmark" of yours.....
Oh Yeah, now I see why...
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1403&page=3
Lower numbers denote faster calculation times (seconds), and hence, better performance.
Super PI (1 Million digits) Benchmark Results (Lower is better)
Processor Seconds Ranking
1. AthlonXP 3000+ 49
2. AthlonXP 3200+ 44
3. Pentium 4 3.0C 43
4. 35
Thanks to the higher FSB the Pentium 4 3.0C even at stock is competitive with the AthlonXP 3200+ which is known to have a powerful FPU.
I wonder what a 3.2 would score..... Don't you Dan??
Semi
Yes, I want to hear all about the tangerine trees and marmalade skies. And the rocking
horse people eating marshmellow pies.
LOL!
Did you know that I heard, that the LITSWD song was actually written about a drug trip on LSD...... Seems appropriate eh???
Semi
There are still some magazines that run their own test, instead of the one Intel puts together and tells them to run.
Dan,
Make sure that you give us a full report out on your Eqyptian Riverboat trip...... Down De-Nial.
Semi
You don't seem to need any help defending yourself. Besides, it is strictly against the 'droid code to defend an Intelevangelist. If i did, they would kick me out of the club :)
Of that I have no doubt.... Turn in your Droid Sash immediately
BTW My Intelevangelist robes are in the cleaners. Do you know where I can get a loaner?
Semi
Just so I'm clear, you are now condemning what AMD is doing, whereas you were condoning the same action by Intel? We all have our biases and hypocrisies.
Just for the record, I thought it was a good thing for Intel and I think it is a good thing for AMD. Good companies need to incentivize good employees.
Dear Black Pot,
No, you're not clear. I didn't condemn anything, I simply implied my lack of "expectation", of the same condemnation of AMD, by AMD fans, that was given to intel by AMD fans. And I can't help noting that you weren't as quick to defend me at the time, as you are quick to criticize me now.... Your silence at the time was deafening. Hypocrisy is right.
The Kettle
SC TO-C: AMD Begins Voluntary Stk Opt Exchange Offer [delayed]
Ridgeland, MS, JUN 20, 2003 (EventX/Knobias.com via COMTEX) --
Advanced Micro Devices Inc (NYSE: AMD) filed an SC TO-C on 6/20, in which the Company reported that it intends to commence a voluntary stock option exchange offer for employees holding stock options with an exercise price equal to or greater than $14.00 under certain of the Company's stock option plans on or about June 25, 2003.
Under the exchange program, eligible employees will have the opportunity to exchange existing stock options for a right to receive replacement options at exchange ratios that, depending on the applicable exercise price of their stock options, range from 1.28 to 1.87 share for 1 replacement share.
And I'm "sure" that the same AMD fans who crucified intel management for reissuing stock options to employees that were under water, and screwing the non-employee shareholders, will now all chime in with the same exact criticism's of AMD..... Right?
Semi
Your post implied that you would give us a break with your QS spam until Athlon64 benchmarks are available. But somehow, I have my doubts that you will take a 3 month break from spamming this board with endless repetitions.
Joe
---Practice what you preach....
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=966125
Posted by: jhalada
In reply to: Elmer Phud who wrote msg# 3150 Date:4/30/2003 9:21:34 PM
Post #of 6823
Elmer,
I have no problem with different standards. Not for AMD and Intel investors, but for posters and hecklers.
Joe
Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation was initiated on May 14, 2003 in response to a worker petition which was filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Intel Corporation, Systems Manufacturing Technology Development, Hillsboro, Oregon (TA-W-51,749) and Intel Corporation, Systems Manufacturing Technology Development, DuPont, Washington (TA-W-51,749A).
http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/wpd/19USC2271.asp
TITLE 19. CUSTOMS DUTIES
CHAPTER 12. TRADE ACT OF 1974
RELIEF FROM INJURY CAUSED BY IMPORT COMPETITION
ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR WORKERS
ie: In other words, a group of dirtbag employees wanted to sue intel, and get money, because they got fired, were pissed off about it, and tried to claim they got fired because intel is hiring foreign workers.
ie: Withdrawn, probably because the petitioners were found to really be worthless dirtbags, and deserved to be fired.
Semi
"Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) has developed a technology called Advanced Process Control (APC) that allows chipmakers to make fine adjustments to their tool sets while wafers go through the manufacturing process. AMD claims its homegrown technology is unmatched."
Please... You want me to start listing all the things AMD claimed that didn't come true?
Actually APC has been around for quite some time, the year 1999 to be more precise. I have to say though that AMD's statement that "They developed it", and that it's a "Homegrown Technology", should result in those making those statements, to have their noses grow WAY beyond the dimension of Gepeto's wooden friend....
The technology was actually developed by a collaboration of Honeywell and AMD, with funding from Sematec, and was commercialized by Objectspace Fab solutions of Austin Texas in 1999-2000 timeframe. Honeywell at the time was a major manufacturer of control systems for the oil, and gas refining industry, which is probably where AMD gets their "We went outside the industry" (cough) claims.
As I understand it, Most of the benefits are realized in Lithography and Planer. In Litho, APC resulted in lower Litho Critical Dimension Sigma (Standard Deviation From The Mean), which decreased End Of Line Speed Sigma by 48%. The result for the initial systems in 1999 was an increase in End Of Line mean speed of +15MHz (Whoooo Hoooooo).
In Planer, where flatness of the polishing and Linear Material removal are the main objectives, it reduced the Cross Wafer Sigma by ~27%, which would most likely improve yields somewhat, although it's hard to tell how much, due to the effect of Planer Sigma being cumulative.
The biggest benefit most likely would not be in Speed increases, or Yield, but in Rework reduction. Initial reports were that due to the improvements in Litho, it had the "Potential" to reduce Litho rework by 83%. No matter how you slice it, that has to result in cost savings.
The main issue that I have with AMD's "announcement" of it now, is that the implementation was apparently accomplished in the 1999-2000 timeframe at AMD's fabs, so I would guess that APC is ALREADY factored into the CURRENT results from their Fabs. I wouldn't pin my hopes on any huge Future Speed and/or Cost benefits, since it seems to have been running in AMD's fabs for several years now, and was certainly operational during the entire development of Athlon and Opteron. Here are links if you want to read more......
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/honeywell.htm
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/honey2.htm
Semi
BenQ launches first Centrino notebook
David Tzeng and Walson Hu, Taipei; Wen-Yu Lang, DigiTimes.com [Wednesday 18 June 2003]
Having launched its first Centrino notebook on Tuesday, Taiwan-based BenQ targets selling a total of 100,000 notebooks worldwide in 2003, with monthly shipments expected to grow to 15,000 units by year-end from about 4,000-5,000 currently, according to Jerry Wang, BenQ's general manager of sales
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/06/18&pages=04&seq=13
WOW, I'm stoked, because according to Petz, "Centrino Is Not Pulling It's Weight". Gee, If that were true, what's up with all the companies adopting it?? I can't WAIT until the Droids think it is, because by the time they get their heads out of the sand, Centrino should have ALL the market, eh??
Semi
wbmw: Many are below $1500 as well.
Dan3: That's great.
Why don't you post links to 3 or 4 for us skeptics?
Centrino notebooks, you said.
I found a couple of Dell's:
http://www.dell.com/us/en/bsd/offers/specials_3x_mobile_4m.htm?DGVCode=JP
Intel® CentrinoTM mobile technology
Inspirion 600m $1,149
Latitude D600 $1,399
A Systemax
http://www.globalcomputer.com/go/systemax_pursuit_sc_centrino/
The new Pursuit SC Notebooks are built on the new intel Centrino mobile technology.....
Pursuit SC B13 Notebook $1,299
A ZT Group ZNOTE-1001
http://www.ztgroup.com/znote_order.asp
ZNOTE-1001 $1,399
Intel® Centrino™
mobile technology
Intel® Pentium® M
Processor 1.3GHz
Intel® PRO/Wireless Network Connection 802.11b
That's 3 or 4...... You're welcome
Semi
Besides with all the corruption and indictments these days who really trusts and listens to analysts?
Best
e
Who? Ummmmmm..... You?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=895035
Semi
Semi - That article was a new low, even for Mike Magee. (I think I just made a oxymoron?) No doubt this will be pointed to as more "evidence".
Oh it's obvious to me why. There's an interesting story that I've never told on SI or iHub. Way back when Mike McGee worked for the Register, I wrote an e-mail to one of his co-workers Andrew Thomas. It was about some story he wrote, and in the e-mail, I happened to mention about the fact that Mike appeared to have an anti-intel bias. Andrew wrote back, and what he said was enlightening, and has been in the back of my mind on every story that I've read from McGee since then. In response to my Mike comment, he wrote:
"Yeah, he hates them".
I swear, that's a direct quote from a person who worked with him....... Surprised? Me Neither.
Semi
Has Intel managed to produce on their own, or buy another company with, a working Itanium chipset, yet? Or will Dell have to buy motherboards from HP or IBM, which probably why they were reluctant to sell Itanium systems before. Maybe Dell should think about hiring some design engineers....
Nope, none of the above. I Believe that AMD coerced Dell into dropping Itanium because they promised them cheap Opterons. The tabloids were full of stories about Dell adopting Opteron, so there ya go. Anecdotal Evidence. Should be good enough for this thread....... eh?
Semi
Exactly. Which is why I said "I believe" instead of "I have proof".
Which part of that didn't you understand.
-fyo
Oh I understand FUD spreading allright...... I understand perfectly.
Semi
Oh Look, Now It's HP Too....
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9780
The Madisons that Intel will supply Dell will be very heavily discounted, in a bid to stave off the 2GHz Opteron attack. The Dell move may also be intended to put HP's nose out of joint, we understand.
Of course, that is bound to irritate HP, which will pay far more for the Madison 6MB Itaniums than its younger contender and hated enemy.......
In fact, it appears Intel has "favourites" in what was thought to be a "level playing field", and referees are advised to retire to the changing rooms if Carly Fiorina and HP turn up and demand answers to their questions.
No doubt there will now be reports of "evidence" that intel is strong arming HP too...... I'm surprised McGee didn't choke on using the words "In Fact" in the same sentence as "It Appears"....... Way to go, FUD Master Mike!
Semi
Can't be. As I already stated, I spoke to an IBM Distributor at a recent Tech conference, and he told me different. Of course, I can't reveal his name, because he does not want to piss off AMD, and maybe not get his Opteron order. But trust me, he's completely believable, and I now certainly have enough anecdotal evidence to believe that AMD is strong arming IBM. Nope, sorry, can't accept any technical reasons for a supply shortage, it's definitely AMD strong arming. The distributor told me so, so there ya go. Must go write that letter to the E.U. and the DOJ now...... Bye.
Wait, one more thing. NOW I know why Dell dropped the Original Itanium!!! There was Anecdotal Evidence at the time that Dell was going to use AMD!! Obviously, AMD coerced Dell into dropping Itanium by promising them cheap Opterons..... A-HA!!! Now it's all becoming clear...
Semi
I'm surprised that more haven't picked up on this. No self respecting AMD Fan would deny that Opteron is the future, so obviously IBM has no choice but to knuckle under to AMD's pressure, or else they're out of the game. AMD is clearly in the power position and they ain't taking no prisoners.
Exactly, as a matter of fact, I think that I should write a letter to the Department Of Justice right now to report AMD for their Monopolistic strong arm tactics. I was at a Tech Conference recently, and a distibutor of IBM products told me that an AMD Marketing person had called him, to "Question" him if he really wanted to sell Itanium products at all, and if so, then he suggested that maybe he might not immediately get the Opteron order he put in, seeing how he wasn't a Teir 1 Vendor......
Obviously a veiled threat. Of course, this distributor did not want to go on record with this information, but no doubt we now have ancedotal evidence of AMD's illegal (At least in the E.U.) business practices. I wonder if Mike Magee is interested in this "Evidence"?
Semi
There is a plethora of anectdotal evidence that links Intel with "strong-arming" and other illegal activities. You seem to insist that this is all a great conspiracy between a multitude of independent sources. I don't see a conspiracy theory, but I do believe that Intel crosses the [legal] line in its dealings with customers.
Anectdotal Evidence is not Legal Proof, and your Beliefs are not Legal Proof either.
Oh, I almost forgot....... Tuff Noogies.
Semi
It seems that is already happening:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/30966.html
One user and Register reader tells us he has begged IBM for an Itanium 2-based server, but to no avail. "I've called twice now to try to find how to buy an x450, and both times have just gotten a 'we can't sell that machine here, and we'll have to have the special team call you back' from the (IBM) sales rep," said the source. "They aren't even able to quote me a price, and no price is listed on the Web site."
Looks to me as though AMD has threatened to withhold Opteron if IBM uses Itanium. Sure people will deny it but what else do you expect them to say? Everybody's afraid to speak out for fear of retaliation.
You know, it looks that way to me too. I believe that there is "anectdotal evidence" that AMD is strong arming IBM. After all, why would IBM not be able to supply an Itanium System, when they have already been doing so, prior to their recent business dealings with AMD?
I Believe that obviously AMD has threatened and stong armed IBM with a threat to withdraw their future foundry business, and IBM is "Illegally" being pressured by AMD because IBM does not want to lose the future 65nm business deal thaey have with AMD. I think that we should get the Dept Of Justice to investigate this whole illegal AMD/IBM conspiracy to deny intel it's rightful share of the server market.
Semi
In other words, when some here argue that Intel pressures companies into exclusive arrangements, I claim that it is their legal right - given that no one has shown them to be a monopoly. Some Intel defenders will jump in to deny that Intel would do such a thing, which I find amusing. What world do those people come from, anyway?
Well, maybe they do, maybe they don't. But I've read several comments so far from the other side to wit: "I BELIEVE they are doing it, because there's anectdotal evidence", or "I KNOW they are doing it, because so and so told me so". The problem with belief based on anectdotal infornation, is that it's NOT Legal Proof, and the problem with "I KNOW because someone told me", is defined in legal terms as Heresay, and is also not Legal Proof. Until such time IF and or when such Proof (Not Belief, or Heresay, or Anectdotal) is presented, then I guess the only response I can give to complainers is...... Tuff Noogies.
Semi
Hate to take the other side on this one but I remember reading another interpretation. The Court said that because the alleged actions did not constitute a violation of the Anti-Trust act, Intergraph could not use the charge of Monopoly in this case. It did not say Intel wasn't a Monopoly, just that that argument didn't apply here.
Maybe so, But the point I was making, was that the Judge was specific on striking down each of Intergraph's Monopoly claims individually. Intergraph was ruled not to be a competitor of intel, and therefore couldn't claim monopolistic practices by intel under Sherman.
The same ruling would seem to apply to motherboard makers. While intel makes motherboards, they are not a motherboard maker, they are a chip manufacturer. So once again I don't think it will be possible to make the claim that intel is strong arming Motherboard Manufacturers, on Opteron MB's, and that doing so is a monopolist tactic. The reversal of the Injunction itself, set precedent that strong arm tactics by themselves are not monopolistic.
If the Inquirer is trying to get more advertising money by printing FUD and sensationalism, then I guess they've already succeeded, at least around here. But if the MB makers are going to try and take intel to court on this one and succeed, then they better come up with a different charge. That's all I'm saying.
Semi
P.S.- Or as an alternative I guess they can run off to the EU Courts like Intergraph, and Jerry "I'm Bill Gates Bitch" Sanders did.
Some historical perspective: The modern definition of 'monopoly' was established by the Sherman Antitrust Act, in the late 1800s. Violation of that act means abuse of a monopoly status. Antitrust means to oppose monopoly.
If I recall correctly, I think Intel eventually settled that suit with Intergraph and avoided a finding that they are a monopolist. Let's see... they settled one suit and continued contesting the other on April 15, 2002:
http://www.intergraph.com/press02/settlement.asp
---Incorrect. The courts specifically struck down Intergraph's claims of Intel being a Monopoly under the Sherman Anti Trust act. Intel did not settle the Monopoly claim at all:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2077678,00.html
Judge dismisses antitrust charges against Intel
11:13 Tuesday 14th March 2000
Ken Popovich, ZDNet US
US court rules that Intel did not violate antitrust laws
Intel did not violate federal antitrust laws by withholding product information from Intergraph, the US District Court in Birmingham, Alabama, ruled on Monday in dismissing a lawsuit against the chip maker.......
But Nelson later dismissed Intergraph's patent infringement suit (involving processor cache memory management) against Intel. And in November, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the injunction, contending that while Intel's actions certainly put Intergraph at a disadvantage in the industry, the action itself did not violate antitrust laws.
"The Sherman Antitrust Act does not convert all harsh commercial actions into antitrust violations," the court ruled at the time. "Unilateral conduct that may adversely affect another's business situation, but is not intended to monopolise that business, does not violate the Sherman Act."
---So, since a Federal Court specifically ruled that strong arm business practices Do Not violate the Sherman Anti-Trust laws, Intergraph has in effect shielded Intel from future claims of "Monoplolist" if they strong arm others. Intel should actually thank Intergraph.
Semi
It seems that till Intel steps over the LEGAL line, the bee will take it as slander for amdroid to criticize Intc methods.
It must be common for Emperor style brass butted entities to attract admirers, team players or lackies to justify each and every move. I have seen this situation with petty dictators in general life situations, those who have the instinct to manipulate, but are in denial of their own actions. From the disfunctional family on up, persons or groups seem suseptable to all the human frailties nature will allow.
Not enough that we all get screwed by the capricious bully, we must all like it too.
I wouldn't have said the above except the bee's give no quarter to the descenter. Just as well though.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1056614
---Me thinks thou doth protest too much.
EP,
I stand corrected. I was referrring to this...http://www.intergraph.com/intel/order.htm
However, I hope you can understand what that my basic point was that there are reasons for the suspicion. Good luck,
D
I believe he understands, and just forgot to point out that the injunction you reference was preliminary, and was subsequently reversed on appeal. Not surprised the reversal wasn't mentioned at that site, since the reference given was from Intergraph.
http://www.techlawjournal.com/atr/19991108.htm
Appeals Court Vacates Injunction in Intergraph v. Intel
(November 8, 1999) On Friday, as one federal judge concluded that Microsoft is a monopoly, another federal judge's conclusion that Intel would be found to be an illegal monopoly was reversed. The Court of Appeals vacated the U.S. District Court Judge Edwin Nelson's preliminary injunction in Intergraph v. Intel.
Semi
From Your Favorite "Reporters" (Cough)
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9763
More on Opteron... Lateron
There might be a non-conspiratorial, purely economic reason for the dearth of Opteron MBs.
The Opteron version of AMD64 is targetted at servers. The chipsets available now don't have AGP. Consequently the only thing that can be built is a server board with little utility for other purposes.
The Taiwan MB guys aren't crazy. They generally build multipurpose boards to maximize their sales potential in return for the effort needed to design them and perhaps more importantly build inventory.
AMD sales into the server market have historically been a small percentage of Intel's. Further the server market is much smaller than the desktop market. So it might just be that they chose to wait for an AGP chipset to implement a multipurpose board rather than pursue a smallish percentage of a smallish percentage market.
This combined with a new CPU which has yet to be proven which inspite of the 64bit marketing still adds further risk. Recall how many bugs have been found after a million CPUs have shipped? Server customers are notoriously conservative and would be unlikely to put a AMD64 in a critical path until they have been fully wrung out, preferrably by someone else. That would add another "smallish percentage" multiplier.
Just to pick some numbers out of the air (which no doubt means they're wrong):
x86 Server units = 0.01 x86 Desktop units
AMD server unit share = 0.1
AMD64 "risk factor" = 0.2 (completely arbitrary)
That means the total multiplier might be as low as 0.0002. This in turn needs to be divided by the number of potential suppliers.
Now consider that the server TAM is more than half fulfilled by major OEMs and that whitebox servers would be the destination for these boards and the potential is further reduced. Assuming a generous 150M desktop current annual rate that yields about a 15000 unit whitebox potential for everyone to divide up.
Added to the current state of the world economy then it's no wonder to me why the MB suppliers have chosen to proceed cautiously.
jtm
Email address supplied
---Naaaaaaawwwww, It can't be that....... Could it??? Because then, that would mean that there is no "Evil Empire" conspiracy at all, and although it Walks Like A Duck........ It isn't. Maybe, Just Maybe, it's really a Platypus after all.
Semi
Centrino notebooks to take over half of 3Q shipments
David Tzeng, Taipei; Wen-Yu Lang, DigiTimes.com [Thursday 29 May 2003]
Major notebook vendors expect to see Centrino notebooks account for over half of their total shipments in the third quarter of this year, one to two quarters ahead of the original schedule, sources said.
Dell Computer, IBM, Acer and Asustek Computer predict that Centrino notebooks will take over 50% of their total sales in the third quarter, compared to 20-30% currently, sources said. By this summer, the companies are expected to launch a number of new Centrino models targeting the medium- and low-priced markets, with price tags of between US$1,099-1,599.
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/05/29&pages=04&seq=15
---Now, who was it, that was telling me that Centrino was not "Pulling It's Weight", I forget...... Oh yeah, now I remember....
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1018554
RE:I don't think Centrino is pulling its weight considering the megabucks of marketing thrown at it. Its clear that that only thing consumers will pay top $ for is performance, not battery life. Again, not a single Centrino notebook in CompUSA, Circuit City or Best Buy.
Petz
---Man, 20-30% now, and 50% in the 3rd Quarter. If HALF the notebooks being shipped by Teir 1 Vendors in Q3, is not "Pulling It's Weight", I can't WAIT until Centrino actually starts doing so. Probably have ALL the market by then, eh?
Semi
Top Sellers in Desktop Computers (updated daily)
Below are BizRate's most popular Desktop Computers products. Click on a product to get information, compare best prices, read reviews and check store ratings.
http://bizrate.com/features/top_sellers__de_id--325,cat_id--461.html
Check out #10:
Compaq ProLiant DL590/64 733 MHz
Itanium - 733 MHz - 291.2 GB HD - Red Hat Linux 7.1, Microsoft Windows Advanced Server 2000 LE
Semi
An Interview with Intel's George Alfs
by Bubba "MasterFung" Wolford
http://www.simhq.com/_technology/technology_001a.html
Semi
Intel has been sued for misrepresenting the performance of its products by trumpeting the meaningless mhz of the low performing P4 and stunningly low performing Celeron.
How's that lawsuit going? Hmmmmmmm?
http://geek.com/news/geeknews/2002Aug/chi20020819015931.htm
Is mister "I'm impartial" going to complain about Intel's crooked marketing that has landed them in court?
---Here's what "OverLawyered.Com" Says:
http://overlawyered.com/pages/aboutus.html
Overlawyered.com explores an American legal system that too often turns litigation into a weapon against guilty and innocent alike, erodes individual responsibility, rewards sharp practice, enriches its participants at the public's expense, and resists even modest efforts at reform and accountability.
http://overlawyered.com/archives/02/aug3.html
AUGUST 2002
August 30-September 2 -- Intel sued in notorious county. Lawyers have filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status on behalf of personal computer owners "against Intel, Gateway, and Hewlett-Packard alleging the companies misled them into believing the Pentium 4 was a superior processor to Intel's own Pentium III and AMD's Athlon. The complaint -- Neubauer et al v. Intel et al -- was filed June 3 in the Third Judicial Circuit in Madison County, Illinois." (Tom Mainelli, "Intel, PC Makers Sued Over P4 Performance", PCWorld.com, Aug. 16; discussion, StorageReview forums). Litigation buffs will immediately recognize the chosen venue, Madison County, Ill., as being perhaps the most celebrated destination in the country for class-action "forum-shopping", its courts recognized as unusually accommodating to the designs of the lawyers who file such suits. For one recent view of the county's reputation, see: Adam Liptak, "Court Has Dubious Record as a Class-Action Leader", New York Times, Aug. 15 (reg) (DURABLE LINK)
Dell and HP see first wide-screen Centrino notebooks made by Compal
David Tzeng, Taipei; Wen-Yu Lang, DigiTimes.com [Monday 26 May 2003]
http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/05/26&pages=04&seq=18
Both Dell Computer and Hewlett-Packard (HP), the world's two largest notebook vendors, are having their first wide-screen Centrino notebooks produced by Taiwan-based Compal Electronics, sources said.
While Dell is outsourcing its 15.4-inch Centrino-based Latitude D800 to Compal, HP is ordering its Compaq Presario X1000 notebook, launched recently, from the Taiwanese notebook maker. Initial MONTHLY shipments of the Presario X1000 are estimated at 20,000-30,000 units, according to sources.
I wouldn't let this person set the attitude against all Intel employees. I'm sure they have some that want to rip apart anyone with an opion other than theirs just like any organization. Intel gives options to everyone so this may not be Andy Bryant.
And yes this person cannot discuss the issue without the slam :)
Dear "Black Pot"
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=1040337
I hardly ever do this, but I don't want to have to remove a bunch of personal attacks from this board. I'm asking averyone to stick to the issues surrounding employee stock options and refrain from personally attacking a poster who holds an opinion contrarary to your's. Attack the Position, not the Poster. Please.
greg.
Sincerely,
The Kettle
You seem to have a mighty big chip on your shoulder -and I'm not talking about the kind made of silicon.
Well, thank you so much for sharing your personal attack. I shall certainly give an opinion from someone I don't know, and don't care about, all the consideration that it is due.
Semi