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.
Re: nasqaq has an opening bell?
I think they do have something. Check their website.
IMHO
Re: ringing the opening bell
Thanks for sharing your answer from IR. Hope they are busy preparing for the Nov.7 presentation instead.
IMHO
BDITG = But Do I Thank God
IMHO
September 21, 2015
Mike, Mike, Mike, guess what day it is,
guess what day it is?
WORLD ALZHEIMER’S DAY
http://nationaldaycalendar.com/worlds-alzheimers-day-september-21/
I.e. it took Intel six billion dollars to make Intel's chicken mcnuggets look more attractive than AMD's.
LOL. Really? So the 5.99 billion that AMD put up was not enough?
Did'nt AMD offer $0.00 for their CPU's to HP and HP balked? What does that say about AMD's mcnuggets? <ggg>
IMHO
herb will,
Updated 2011 First Quarter and Full Year Outlook
Separately, Intel (INTC:$21.455,0$-0.005,0-0.02%) recently announced that it had completed the acquisition of the Infineon Technologies AG Wireless Solutions business, which will now operate as the Intel Mobile Communications group. The company also expects to complete the acquisition of McAfee (MFE:$47.90,00$0.0300,0.06%) by the end of the first quarter.
The effects of the chipset issue and these transactions are incorporated into the company's revised outlook. The company now expects first-quarter revenue to be $11.7 billion, plus or minus $400 million, compared to the previous expectation of $11.5 billion, plus or minus $400 million. Gross margin percentage is now expected to be 61 percent, plus or minus a couple percentage points, compared to the previous expectation of 64 percent, plus or minus a couple percentage points. Spending (R&D plus MG&A) is now expected to be approximately $3.6 billion, compared to the previous expectation of approximately $3.4 billion.
The full-year revenue growth percentage is now expected to be in the mid-to high teens, compared to the company's prior expectation of approximately 10 percent. Full-year gross margin is now expected to be 63 percent, plus or minus a few percentage points, compared to the previous expectation of 65 percent, plus or minus a few percentage points. Spending (R&D plus MG&A) is now expected to be $15.7 billion, plus or minus $200 million, compared to the company's previous expectation of $13.9 billion, plus or minus $200 million. Research and development (R&D) spending is now expected to be approximately $8.2 billion, compared to the previous forecast of $7.3 billion.
All other expectations for the first-quarter and full-year remain unchanged. With the exception of McAfee (MFE:$47.90,00$0.0300,0.06%) , the outlook for the first quarter and full year do not include the effect of any acquisitions, divestitures or similar transactions that may be completed after Jan. 31. The acquisition of McAfee (MFE:$47.90,00$0.0300,0.06%) is subject to customary closing conditions.
Indeed, there was a slew of DJ headlines coming across a few moments ago. Apparently they will take a charge for the failure but increase the expected revenues for the next quarter. Some good news actually, considering the initial headline of a chip flaw.
IMHO
mmoy,
But this is why there are apps. Apps are local applications and developers can code with performance in mind. It seems to me that most web developers really don't care about the performance on the end-users machines.
I am not sure this really matters. The browser is a local app too. My understanding is that the underlying features (horsepower) needed for the more powerful browser are needed by writers of apps. Without getting into symantics, there is a fuzzy line between applications (apps), web browsers, and operating systems (just ask Microsoft when they were asked to split IE from windows). Bottom line, and my original point is that the need for processing power will go up, not down.
IMHO
DavidA2,
The ARM guys have a point.
The applications that require more processing power is decreasing, so every step ARM takes in better performance mean more and more potential for them to take x86 marketshare.
Disagree. The most important application in use today on mobiles is the web browser. With the advent of HTML5 and CSS3 and other future enhancements, the browser will require more horsepower, not less.
IMHO
fastpathguru,
Why are you LOL'ing? Does something in there imply victory to you?
I don't see it.
There is a 30 day period when the public can comment before the settlement is officially approved. I suggest you email the FTC and add your public voice of approval for this "victory".
IMHO
sheriffbakanay,
How do you see the below working?
Sounds ridiculous to me.
Intel also will have to reimburse all software vendors who want to recompile their software using a non-Intel compiler.
That is the most bizzare portion of the settlement. I read that Intel will set up a $10 million fund for this. My WAG is that someone who bought the Intel compiler and wants to use another one will get a rebate from Intel to subsidize their non-Intel efforts.
IMHO
fastpathguru,
Intel is being "gone after", for issues less mundane than accounting practices.
Last line in the release:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SEC acknowledges the assistance of the Federal Trade Commission in this investigation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is rather obvious Intel is a target. Being a target and being proven guilty are two different things. My question specifically is about the Dell case. If Intel has done something bad or illegal, why has the SEC not gone after Intel? If they have proof of what they allege, this would be a major feather in their cap.
As for the FTC investigation, let's just wait and see what happens.
It is easy to accuse and settle. Not so easy to accuse and prove. No one, in the USA at least, has proven anything that has been alleged concerning Intel and AMD.
IMHO
smooth2o,
Not your post, but I don't get why these matter. These rebates simply reduce the cost of goods sold and if they go to "marketing programs" then they appear below the operating line. What gives the SEC the right to require public accounting of these items? Also, as one article says, "Intel should have reported these items to the SEC". Why?
Well, I agree with you. However, we are in this age of "we need more transparency" and that is partly the reason.
IMHO
fastpathguru,
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IOW, show me the above two paragraphs that are directly from an SEC document and can be quoted as such.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-131.htm
Thanks for showing us that. Any idea why they have not gone after Intel? Perhaps the allegations can't be proven?
IMHO
fastpathguru,
In particular, according to the SEC, Dell executives failed to let investors know about large payments from Intel that had been made to convince Dell not to use processors from Advanced Micro Devices in its systems.
"It was these payments rather than the company's management and operations that allowed Dell to meet its earnings targets, the SEC said in a statement July 22."
In the above two paragraphs, the first paragraph is what the author interprets about the payments, yet the second paragraph is a direct quote of the SEC about "these payments". What payments in the second paragraph is the SEC talking about? If it where the payments in the first paragraph, why is the first paragraph not a direct quote, like the second? You digg what I am saying?
IOW, show me the above two paragraphs that are directly from an SEC document and can be quoted as such.
IMHO
ibc,
You really think Nokia is the horse to bet on?
What makes you think it wasn't Nokia who is betting on the Intel horse?
BTW - Another article on the Intel Classmate, which you have yet to comment on (I think?)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20003576-1.html
The iPad, feature wise, is rather mediocre. What tips the scales heavily in the other direction, however, are 2 things:
1) the 10+ battery life
2) and perhaps the biggest factor, it's excellent UI
To a smaller extent, the application development momentum.
The above, Apples fanatics, and the fact that next gen competitive products have yet to hit the market, makes it look like a grand slam. I think it is a great product, and by any measure, will succeed. But it will carve out a niche market, I think. It will not take over.
IMHO
VBG,
Why does it seem like Intel is always partnering with also-rans?
Perhaps you should ask yourself, why "also-rans" choose to partner with Intel? [hint: They want to become the best]
IMHO
fastpathguru,
IMHO the tablet form factor is about focusing on a "pure" client or "information consumer" experience, not so much simply being compact. Very much an "electronic magazine" for casual use.
...
Like a magazine, 8.5x11" is a widely accepted aesthetic, and you'll see later generations of tablets pushing up the screen size and attempting to squeeze the bezel out of the device, towards the ideal of an "interactive sheet of paper."
You are on the right track. A couple of points:
1) You state the tablet as primarily an information "consumer" ( i.e. read only ) and yet the goal is for "interactivity"? I agree that is the goal, but do you think the iPad or similar devices come close?
2) Continuing with the line of thinking. If you had a "interactive sheet of paper", what would you be missing, in order to be productive? [Hint: what if you had a plain sheet of paper? ]
IMHO
tatertot,
A virtual keyboard is as acceptable as a numeric keypad is for whipping off quick IMs/tweets/emails/etc
Bull. It simply isn't. Virtual touch keyboards are horrible
I agree. Do you notice the Apple ad's that show the touch keyboard and the hands and fingers erect as if poking at the "keyboard"? How unnatural. Not to mention that the sleek design is a detriment. Try typing with the pad on your knees?
IMHO
AMD doing business with Iran
...along with a number of other US companies. Not Intel.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN0924563920100309?type=marketsNews
The group's website lists 200 companies targeted over their dealings with Iran. It includes names such as Honeywell International Inc (HON.N) , Royal-Dutch Shell Plc (RDSa.L), Hewlett-Packard Co (HPQ.N) Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD.N) and Coca-Cola Co (KO.N).
Something tells me AMD will continue to do business with Iran for a long long time.
IMHO
drjohn,
Intel To Pit Convertible Classmate Against Apple's iPad Tablet?
http://www.itproportal.com/www/news/article/2010/3/2/intel-pit-convertible-classmate-against-apples-ipad-tablet/
I like it. At the right price it will be a great product for its targeted market. Couple of comments.
1) An "Apple iPad Tablet". What is that? Apple's iPad is not a tablet, IMHO. It is a good device, but the Intel Classmate and Apple iPad have enough differences that they probably will not compete directly. Both can be successful. Very successful.
2) Got a chuckle out of the large stylus. The poor stylus has gotten a bad rap, especially from Steve Jobs and Apple. The fact is that the stylus' we are mostly familiar with are the ones that came with small screen devices, like PDA's and smartphones. Being the size of a large toothpick, these things were often more useful as pointing devices (replacing a mouse) than for character input (replacing a keyboard). IMHO, the larger stylus is a great idea for a tablet with a larger screen and will give new life to handwriting recognition input. There are special applications where this will come in handy (pun intended).
Yep, the Classmate has come a long way.
IMHO
RobertG,
Unexpectedly low Apple iPad price forces notebook vendors to re-evaluate their tablet PC strategies
Interesting twist on what, I think, really happened. Apple's attempt at a $999 tablet turned out to be a slick netbook with a touchscreen. Considering netbooks (w/out the touchscreen) can go for around $299, it is no wonder Apple was forced to drop the price. Don't get me wrong, the iPad is a cool device and will have the typical Apple fanatics behind it, but there is definitely an opportunity for competitors.
This whole thing is going to be a semantics and marketing war. People have called it a netbook, a large iPhone, a tablet, etc.
IMHO
RobertG,
Here is the keyboard setup and below the case
Looks compelling. That is what you expect from Apple. I imagine the Apple options that make it compelling will add up so that there may be opportunities for competitors to offer similar or better values in the "netbook" space, ie. Intel Inside :)
The point I was making is that the iPad is not a device between an iPhone and a netbook. That product category is more appropriately filled by a MID device. The kind that Intel has been showing off. Whether people want such a device remains to be seen, however.
IMHO
RobertG,
I watched the presentation. This is a lot nicer than any netbook
I tend to agree. The problem I see is that Apple is showcasing it as something between an iPhone and a netbook (see SJ's intro). It is what it is; as you said "a nicer..netbook", primarily because it has a touchscreen.
Even with touch capability this is a "read-only" device, much like the Amazon Kindle. If you want a true slate device, I personally feel you need a stylus and accurate handwriting capability (as well as detachable keyboard option). I think people in Asia have similar preferences. Call it what you want, but Apples "iPad" is neither a tablet, slate or a pad.
Of course this is Apple, and their ability to market and sell their products can overcome any of the issues raised above.
IMHO
jay1000,
When Intel gave AMD 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS; it opened itself up to all kinds of future accusations of wrong doing, liability,and extortion (of course).
It will always be perceived as an admission of guilt.
In my opinion it was a disastrous, foolish and short sighted decision.
Giving away 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS to it's inferior whining rival was a dreadful mistake. I wonder if the Intel's chief council quit in disgust because of this.
I agree, especially when the focus is on Intel shareholders (nothing will hinder Intel technology). Consider that even with Intel paying AMD, AMD counsel continues to pile on to this garbage by welcoming the FTC's action. What exactly did Intel gain with the settlement? Philip Morris is surviving and flourishing after it was dragged in front of judges and juries, and with a weaker case, in my opinion. Intel failed to see that their image has as high a value as their brand. They would be willing to fight for one, but not the other.
IMHO