Intel Corp (INTC)

[Maui]

Re : "Yes, I guess I do think it's fair of me to ask you to figure out what I meant."

We obviously disagree here.

Re : "I do communicate honestly and directly, if you don't get it - you don't, but don't be obtuse."

I admit I generalised my overall feeling about this theard and painted it in my response to your post. I cannot help but feel that there are way too many posters on this thread, who tend to view Intel with rose-tinted glasses. In spite of all the evidence that there have been so many screw-up in the last 5 years (Timna cancelation, 1.13GHz Pentium recall, Rambus, Tejas fiasco, now Grantsdale, etc etc) and yet there seems to be little discussion and acknowledgement of these. While Intel has done very well identifying and enabling macro trends (centrino, comminication-computing convergence, going after very high end server market, etc), it is a different company in terms of execution than the one in early 90s (other than FDIV problem, I cant think of any major ones) and it shows a little, in the stock price. There is constant justification for these screw-ups on this thread. You response typifies it. And many on this thread tend to have blinders on them when it comes to objectively looking at Intels mess-up (there are very few exceptions in wbmw, saturn, john fowler, etc).

As a shareholder I would rather have poster discuss intels (and its competitor) achievements and screw-ups more objectively and honestly. I am certain Intel Management wants to do the same.

I do not mean to imply you are dishonest and indirect. But, your response to me does smack of bias for Intel to an extreme.

Maui.