Perhaps this was what drove the VirtualPC purchase, emulating a Pentium 700 Mhz shouldn't be tough for a G5 in a year or two, (when the console is released).
There was a test build of Win2k for Alpha, that I've seen (had a friend with an Alpha), but never heard of any PPC builds. NT was built with many architectures in mind, with the goal of being run as the workstation OS regardless of architecture, so I would think that what's needed to run an XBox would be pretty portable.
The ship to ship was great, although a bit easy, if you had a fast ship and rear mounted cannons, and a ton of time. I remember getting a bit sea sick watching the ship toss on the waves. The sword fighting engine, was definitly wierd, it took some getting used to, it was very slow and strategic, not hack and slash. I got tired of sailing my ship into all the ports, and the storyline was pretty lame, but exp and officers were too hard to come by if you didn't get very far on it. I really liked the openendedness of Pirates!
It is very unlikely that there is more than a billion in VC money invested in Google. Now that does provide a pretty reasonable return (no worse than 15%), but VC works on the principle of we invest our money in 100 companies, 90 of which we expect to fail, or liquidate with no gain, the 10 successful companies must return enough to produce a return of 15% or better on the whole fund, or about 1500% over the life of the investment. Google is one of the succesful companies, and has to produce that kind of return. The 15 billion would easily exceed this number, but remember that the VCs can't sell for 6 months, depending on the lockout agreement. They want to IPO because investors are currently willing to pay 100 times earnings for exciting tech companies.
I don't know about the rest of Yahoo, but Yahoo finance does a better job of news collecting for a list of tickers than about any other source out there, and that includes services that cost several thousand dollars a month.
Actually, the CEO is just an important employee, unless he owns stock, he does not benefit from the incoproration. The people who do are the owners, who would not be personally liable for debts of the corporation. Normally with the exeption of fruad, it's very hard to peirce the corporate veil. If a corporation goes bankrupt, you can not go after the presumably wealthy investors of the corporation as you could in a sole proprietorship or partnership. That is the reason law firms, accountanting firms, engineering firms are rarely incorporated, the powers that be decided that since they have the potential to screw up with their professional opinions that their personal fortunes should be on the line if they screw up bad enough. Now LLCs and LLPs have mostly eliminated that risk for all but a few general partners.
Safire was a speechwriter for Nixon, and is a frequent (weekly?) columnist to the op-ed page. Almost every paper has a bent, and a token columnist who disagrees with the attitude of the editorial page. It's also important to differentiate between the attitude of the op-ed page (where bias is good) and the news pages (where it is unfortunate, but unavoidable). Things like article placement, tone, and the like are imporant and are too often ignored, on both sides. I'd say that of the major US papers the WSJ is a little more conservative, and the NY Times and WA Post are a little to the left, but all three at least have the goal of objectivity on the news pages. For a good understanding of the issues, it would be best to get your news from several sources, so you can begin to filter the bias out and keep the facts.
The same thing that allows them to tell anyone to piss off now. Being public just means that there is an exchange available for trading (it's a bit more complex, but we can ignore those complexities for now) if people don't want to buy or sell it doesn't have to trade. Think of it like being put on the shelf at Walmart, being there gives a product the opportunity to trade, but if it's crappy enough no one will buy it, or if Walmart didn't want to sell it, they could hide it pretty well. A good example of this is Viacom or Comcast, they are public companies, but it would literally be impossible to have a hosile takeover of either, since the majority shareholders Summer Redstone and the Robert's family, respeecivly, control the voting rights to more than half the shares. Oracle would be a difficult target, Larry owns 20% of the company, meaning that you have to convince 63% of the remaining shareholders to sell. In Google's case, their future decisions depend on who owns the company now. The founders, and vcs probably each have a healty chunk and employees likely have a smaller stake. The VCs would probably sell their holdings after the lockout period, which would increase the number of shares that are available. If Google were added to the S&P 500, its likely after a year or two, since their a big name and valuation is expected to be north of $10B, they a healthy stake would be owned by index funds (figure 10-20% of the total investment money is indexed, largely to the 500, and they would probably own about that share of the company). Index funds almost always vote their shares as ISS (Institutional Shareholder Services) recommends, which might be enough to justify a merger, as it was for the HP Compaq merger.
The only non monetary based system that I recall reading about that seemed like it might actually work, was in Bellamy's futuristic book "Looking Backward". In it they had the socialist utopia in which workers worked for differing amounts of time based on how many people wanted to do the job, to fill the need. If you were a coal miner you worked less (want lots of free time, be a sewage engineer and work 2 weeks a year) than a vet with the cute fuzzy animals (note I've pulled calves before and realize that this is far from the truth), and everyone got their allocation of goods, it seems like it might work in the ST universe, assuming you can restrict (dang here comes scarcity again) access to the replicators to only those with a job.
I think the point of the article is that until about 50 years ago, eating too much was quite impractical for the vast majority of even the western world's population, it would have been healthy to pack on a few extra pounds for most people. Also spam is a much worse problem than junk mail, simply because the cost is near zero for the spammer, due to the much reduced scarcity of bandwidth. Scarcity in this sense is a technical term, its useage is more like allocation we are constrained by our own resources, as we allocate our resources we choose the scarce goods that we want most. Following the tremendous reduction in cost of food, especially unhealthy food, (heathy stuff is still pretty scarce and pricy; check the price of fish and whole wheat bread to pork or beef and white bread next time your at the market) as a result we are following our instincts: fatten up now (low scarcity) for next winter or a bad harvest (increased scarcity) that never came.
Covert action was too much fun. I used to fire it up every time I went home, til the HD died. I lost the original disks long ago. I liked the graphics, never has anyone been in so much fear of a yellow square.
Grab some techno or R&B with an interesting baseline (quick punches, changing frequencies, I noticed in about 2 seconds with the Propellerheads), and use a sub, it seems like the lighter codecs do a worse job on the sub 50 Hz frequencies because so many people won't be listening with a proper speaker system. WM9 and AAC at 192 kbps both to a better job in the lower frequencies, but 128kbps mp3s or even quality 7 or 8 oggs didn't. I have decent but not audiophile stuff (Paradigm speakers around and a Technics amp), and I run my computer through the home theater system. Over most computer speakers or walkman style headphones you are probably wasting time beyond 64 kbps with a good codec.
Assuming that some plastic compounds must be made from hydrocarbons (no other way to make them through other means), think about the change that would take place if oil got to $1000 per barrel (I don't think there are many uses that are worth this price but a higher price makes the example easier), as we get close to the end. You wouldn't drive a gasoline powered car or heat your home with oil, since it would cost something like $40 a gallon for gas, but you could stil use that plastic for those high value, your hypo goes from a quarter to $5 a big jump but probably worth paying. Economics is if nothing else, a great way to ensure that the best use of a commodity is what it gets used for, the environmental problem now is that we have too much oil, it's too cheap so we use it for all sorts of lower value uses. Oh and plastics are polymerrific.
Re:No one took your time in the first place.
on
Take Back Your Time!
·
· Score: 1
You have a great deal, if your employer offers benefits through retirement keep them. Your employeer is probably paying between $200-$400/mo for your insurance. And were all generally young and healthy. Try to find that same deal for insurance on your own when your sixty and have undergone a bypass. The health care costs all stem back to WWII with the salary cap employers coundn't find enough good employees and still pay below the cap, so they began to throw health insurnace into the benefits offering. After a while it became common enough that the government gave a tax break on health care bought by your employeer as a benefit, check your stub that money comes out pre tax. Because everyone likes saving taxes, most people (outside of those who are self or un employed, sorry to anyone who is) recieve health insurance from their employer. Because most health care providers don't bill you directly, they bill the insurer, there is too small an incentive to shop for price in anything in the health care industry. As a result prices have risen in that industry at a rate rivaling college tuition (also partly paid by the government anyone see a pattern). Foreign (Mostly European and Canada) countries with national health care plans utilize regulation and/or monopsony buying power to keep health care costs down. Additionally they don't have the same problem of monster malpractice suits raising doctor's costs that the US does. Structurally something has to change here, and unfortunately it appears that congress (both parties) will try to band-aid the system rather than fix the underling problem. It isn't in anyones interest to lower costs, it's too easy for everyone to free ride if someone did, but a small group shares the benefits of raising costs. So just like the sugar quota all of us lose out, while a small group collects the benefits.
Wall Street is filled with black humor, tombstones are the ads that often appear in the market section of the paper, there is one in the journal almost every day that gives the name of the company announcing the offering* of securities, the lead and other banks taking the company public, and usually the amount of the offering. I found a pretty plane jane example for an Iron Mountain debt offering here. Won't that firm be surpised when they check their logs today. An offering for public securities would have a ton of fine print including this is not an offer to buy or sell securities, and tell you how to find a copy of a prospectus.
Usually the underwriter places most of the IPO shares in the hands of valued clients at the issue price, which is set prior to trading and is usually the spread that the underwriting firm makes. This is the very low price that the stock starts to trade at, at which point the first market makers (or specialist) set the prices based on orders. Most of the time, early investors hold the shares (and record a paper gain), it is rare for a company to own it's own stock that early in the game. Underwriting fees have been as high as 6% of the deal, (it's in the prospectus). I don't think it's well reported how often, or how large of a position the bank keeps of any deals, but there are exchange regulations on how many shareholders must be in a company so the bank has to give some stock to others. IPOs shares are also given to former banking clients, as well as other particularly big or big fee generating clients. I know Ebbers got IPO shares, with all his debt offerings, he made decisions that allocated millions of dollars in fees.
The only difference between this and the regular IPO market, where average Joe's bid prices into stratospheric heights, is that Google gets to sell the stock to the average Joes, instead of friends of the investment bankers, who bought the stock from Google at the "realistic" value.
I know Cargill (a big private farm services company, like ADM) was issuing stock to employees. They set a price (probably using public competitors multiples of their assets and earnings) at regular periods and permitted trading (with the company), under a set of restrictions. The company's management felt that they were losing too many good employees to public comanies and instituted the policy to stem the losses.
Ebay currently doesn't permit trading of actual public securities on its service, there are a ton of regulations on how this would work, and becoming an exchange it would require them to alter thier stance on fradulent auctions. Exchanges aren't allowed to hide behind caveat emptor when a counter party doesn't deliver the goods. However, after growth stagnates in other areas they will likely move into finance. Investment banking is a huge, profitable industry that currently thrives on a few close relationships to place securities in the hands of investors. Just as trading used use people in an open outcry system, and now largely uses computers, even the NYSE is slowly moving away from specialists, (they're faster, cheaper, and more efficient) the placement of new securities will probably be done with computers in our lifetime, much to the chagrin of the bankers, who currently define the meaning of making bank.
If google's management believes this, then now is the ideal time to take the company public. They will get a good price now for what will be essentially worthless in a few years. They could issue stock for a percentage of the company save the cash (and return to private life after the crash with a few extra billion in the bank), or make an acquisition that will have value later (AOL shareholders made out like bandits getting half of TimeWarner instead of nothing). Besides there will be a ton of pressure on the company to go public, their earlier investors want out, and the investment banks see Google as something like Netscape, a great zooming IPO that could reinvigorate the IPO market when they do go public. Not that it should, but it probably will bring excitement back to an area that thrives on hopes and dreams.
As I understand it, the ball point pen was developed for early pilots, who couldn't use a quill or fountain pen, because they didn't write well, or the ink leaked too often. I think Bic developed them, and got a nice prize from the government at that time.
Don't be so worried about anyone with an HP, they had to teach themselves everything about the calc (because the teacher didn't know how to help them), which usually means they understand the math behind it pretty well. Fear for the TI-82 weilders, who mostly learn button pressing. Alot of math classes and texts are integrating calculators very early on in the program. Go find a middleschooler who actually knows their times tables, they're getting pretty rare.
I am an everyday user of Office, I do use many of the features that most people would accuse of being bloat. Also, I've used Star and Open office (Lotus is still my favorite), and love it once I get the keyboard shortcuts and menu items converted. But I cannot figure out what the point of smart tags is other than to annoy me.
SUN's biggest problem is that they employ a ton of chip (second only to Intel) and system designers to design their systems. As I understand it, Fujitsu develops their own chip compatable with the SPARC architecture. The two companies are now competing with Intel who sells 100 million CPUs a year (Xeon doesn't require a whole lot of R&D beyond a regular P4), in a good year they both might sell 5 million CPUs (I'm not positive about fujitsu's unit volumes) so their cost per chip is significantly higher. Combining these efforts should help both companies reduce costs, by spreading lower development costs over more CPUs, and might help them compete with the new IA-32 based competitors.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps this was what drove the VirtualPC purchase, emulating a Pentium 700 Mhz shouldn't be tough for a G5 in a year or two, (when the console is released).
There was a test build of Win2k for Alpha, that I've seen (had a friend with an Alpha), but never heard of any PPC builds. NT was built with many architectures in mind, with the goal of being run as the workstation OS regardless of architecture, so I would think that what's needed to run an XBox would be pretty portable.
The ship to ship was great, although a bit easy, if you had a fast ship and rear mounted cannons, and a ton of time. I remember getting a bit sea sick watching the ship toss on the waves. The sword fighting engine, was definitly wierd, it took some getting used to, it was very slow and strategic, not hack and slash. I got tired of sailing my ship into all the ports, and the storyline was pretty lame, but exp and officers were too hard to come by if you didn't get very far on it. I really liked the openendedness of Pirates!
It is very unlikely that there is more than a billion in VC money invested in Google. Now that does provide a pretty reasonable return (no worse than 15%), but VC works on the principle of we invest our money in 100 companies, 90 of which we expect to fail, or liquidate with no gain, the 10 successful companies must return enough to produce a return of 15% or better on the whole fund, or about 1500% over the life of the investment. Google is one of the succesful companies, and has to produce that kind of return. The 15 billion would easily exceed this number, but remember that the VCs can't sell for 6 months, depending on the lockout agreement. They want to IPO because investors are currently willing to pay 100 times earnings for exciting tech companies.
I don't know about the rest of Yahoo, but Yahoo finance does a better job of news collecting for a list of tickers than about any other source out there, and that includes services that cost several thousand dollars a month.
Actually, the CEO is just an important employee, unless he owns stock, he does not benefit from the incoproration. The people who do are the owners, who would not be personally liable for debts of the corporation. Normally with the exeption of fruad, it's very hard to peirce the corporate veil. If a corporation goes bankrupt, you can not go after the presumably wealthy investors of the corporation as you could in a sole proprietorship or partnership. That is the reason law firms, accountanting firms, engineering firms are rarely incorporated, the powers that be decided that since they have the potential to screw up with their professional opinions that their personal fortunes should be on the line if they screw up bad enough. Now LLCs and LLPs have mostly eliminated that risk for all but a few general partners.
Safire was a speechwriter for Nixon, and is a frequent (weekly?) columnist to the op-ed page. Almost every paper has a bent, and a token columnist who disagrees with the attitude of the editorial page. It's also important to differentiate between the attitude of the op-ed page (where bias is good) and the news pages (where it is unfortunate, but unavoidable). Things like article placement, tone, and the like are imporant and are too often ignored, on both sides. I'd say that of the major US papers the WSJ is a little more conservative, and the NY Times and WA Post are a little to the left, but all three at least have the goal of objectivity on the news pages. For a good understanding of the issues, it would be best to get your news from several sources, so you can begin to filter the bias out and keep the facts.
The same thing that allows them to tell anyone to piss off now. Being public just means that there is an exchange available for trading (it's a bit more complex, but we can ignore those complexities for now) if people don't want to buy or sell it doesn't have to trade. Think of it like being put on the shelf at Walmart, being there gives a product the opportunity to trade, but if it's crappy enough no one will buy it, or if Walmart didn't want to sell it, they could hide it pretty well. A good example of this is Viacom or Comcast, they are public companies, but it would literally be impossible to have a hosile takeover of either, since the majority shareholders Summer Redstone and the Robert's family, respeecivly, control the voting rights to more than half the shares. Oracle would be a difficult target, Larry owns 20% of the company, meaning that you have to convince 63% of the remaining shareholders to sell. In Google's case, their future decisions depend on who owns the company now. The founders, and vcs probably each have a healty chunk and employees likely have a smaller stake. The VCs would probably sell their holdings after the lockout period, which would increase the number of shares that are available. If Google were added to the S&P 500, its likely after a year or two, since their a big name and valuation is expected to be north of $10B, they a healthy stake would be owned by index funds (figure 10-20% of the total investment money is indexed, largely to the 500, and they would probably own about that share of the company). Index funds almost always vote their shares as ISS (Institutional Shareholder Services) recommends, which might be enough to justify a merger, as it was for the HP Compaq merger.
The only non monetary based system that I recall reading about that seemed like it might actually work, was in Bellamy's futuristic book "Looking Backward". In it they had the socialist utopia in which workers worked for differing amounts of time based on how many people wanted to do the job, to fill the need. If you were a coal miner you worked less (want lots of free time, be a sewage engineer and work 2 weeks a year) than a vet with the cute fuzzy animals (note I've pulled calves before and realize that this is far from the truth), and everyone got their allocation of goods, it seems like it might work in the ST universe, assuming you can restrict (dang here comes scarcity again) access to the replicators to only those with a job.
I think the point of the article is that until about 50 years ago, eating too much was quite impractical for the vast majority of even the western world's population, it would have been healthy to pack on a few extra pounds for most people. Also spam is a much worse problem than junk mail, simply because the cost is near zero for the spammer, due to the much reduced scarcity of bandwidth.
Scarcity in this sense is a technical term, its useage is more like allocation we are constrained by our own resources, as we allocate our resources we choose the scarce goods that we want most. Following the tremendous reduction in cost of food, especially unhealthy food, (heathy stuff is still pretty scarce and pricy; check the price of fish and whole wheat bread to pork or beef and white bread next time your at the market) as a result we are following our instincts: fatten up now (low scarcity) for next winter or a bad harvest (increased scarcity) that never came.
Covert action was too much fun. I used to fire it up every time I went home, til the HD died. I lost the original disks long ago. I liked the graphics, never has anyone been in so much fear of a yellow square.
Weren't PCs known by their longer name "IBM PC compatibles" well into the mid 1990s? I know my first system was billed as that.
Grab some techno or R&B with an interesting baseline (quick punches, changing frequencies, I noticed in about 2 seconds with the Propellerheads), and use a sub, it seems like the lighter codecs do a worse job on the sub 50 Hz frequencies because so many people won't be listening with a proper speaker system. WM9 and AAC at 192 kbps both to a better job in the lower frequencies, but 128kbps mp3s or even quality 7 or 8 oggs didn't. I have decent but not audiophile stuff (Paradigm speakers around and a Technics amp), and I run my computer through the home theater system. Over most computer speakers or walkman style headphones you are probably wasting time beyond 64 kbps with a good codec.
Assuming that some plastic compounds must be made from hydrocarbons (no other way to make them through other means), think about the change that would take place if oil got to $1000 per barrel (I don't think there are many uses that are worth this price but a higher price makes the example easier), as we get close to the end. You wouldn't drive a gasoline powered car or heat your home with oil, since it would cost something like $40 a gallon for gas, but you could stil use that plastic for those high value, your hypo goes from a quarter to $5 a big jump but probably worth paying. Economics is if nothing else, a great way to ensure that the best use of a commodity is what it gets used for, the environmental problem now is that we have too much oil, it's too cheap so we use it for all sorts of lower value uses. Oh and plastics are polymerrific.
You have a great deal, if your employer offers benefits through retirement keep them. Your employeer is probably paying between $200-$400/mo for your insurance. And were all generally young and healthy. Try to find that same deal for insurance on your own when your sixty and have undergone a bypass.
The health care costs all stem back to WWII with the salary cap employers coundn't find enough good employees and still pay below the cap, so they began to throw health insurnace into the benefits offering. After a while it became common enough that the government gave a tax break on health care bought by your employeer as a benefit, check your stub that money comes out pre tax. Because everyone likes saving taxes, most people (outside of those who are self or un employed, sorry to anyone who is) recieve health insurance from their employer. Because most health care providers don't bill you directly, they bill the insurer, there is too small an incentive to shop for price in anything in the health care industry. As a result prices have risen in that industry at a rate rivaling college tuition (also partly paid by the government anyone see a pattern). Foreign (Mostly European and Canada) countries with national health care plans utilize regulation and/or monopsony buying power to keep health care costs down. Additionally they don't have the same problem of monster malpractice suits raising doctor's costs that the US does. Structurally something has to change here, and unfortunately it appears that congress (both parties) will try to band-aid the system rather than fix the underling problem. It isn't in anyones interest to lower costs, it's too easy for everyone to free ride if someone did, but a small group shares the benefits of raising costs. So just like the sugar quota all of us lose out, while a small group collects the benefits.
Wall Street is filled with black humor, tombstones are the ads that often appear in the market section of the paper, there is one in the journal almost every day that gives the name of the company announcing the offering* of securities, the lead and other banks taking the company public, and usually the amount of the offering. I found a pretty plane jane example for an Iron Mountain debt offering here. Won't that firm be surpised when they check their logs today. An offering for public securities would have a ton of fine print including this is not an offer to buy or sell securities, and tell you how to find a copy of a prospectus.
Usually the underwriter places most of the IPO shares in the hands of valued clients at the issue price, which is set prior to trading and is usually the spread that the underwriting firm makes. This is the very low price that the stock starts to trade at, at which point the first market makers (or specialist) set the prices based on orders. Most of the time, early investors hold the shares (and record a paper gain), it is rare for a company to own it's own stock that early in the game. Underwriting fees have been as high as 6% of the deal, (it's in the prospectus). I don't think it's well reported how often, or how large of a position the bank keeps of any deals, but there are exchange regulations on how many shareholders must be in a company so the bank has to give some stock to others. IPOs shares are also given to former banking clients, as well as other particularly big or big fee generating clients. I know Ebbers got IPO shares, with all his debt offerings, he made decisions that allocated millions of dollars in fees.
The only difference between this and the regular IPO market, where average Joe's bid prices into stratospheric heights, is that Google gets to sell the stock to the average Joes, instead of friends of the investment bankers, who bought the stock from Google at the "realistic" value.
I know Cargill (a big private farm services company, like ADM) was issuing stock to employees. They set a price (probably using public competitors multiples of their assets and earnings) at regular periods and permitted trading (with the company), under a set of restrictions. The company's management felt that they were losing too many good employees to public comanies and instituted the policy to stem the losses.
Ebay currently doesn't permit trading of actual public securities on its service, there are a ton of regulations on how this would work, and becoming an exchange it would require them to alter thier stance on fradulent auctions. Exchanges aren't allowed to hide behind caveat emptor when a counter party doesn't deliver the goods. However, after growth stagnates in other areas they will likely move into finance.
Investment banking is a huge, profitable industry that currently thrives on a few close relationships to place securities in the hands of investors. Just as trading used use people in an open outcry system, and now largely uses computers, even the NYSE is slowly moving away from specialists, (they're faster, cheaper, and more efficient) the placement of new securities will probably be done with computers in our lifetime, much to the chagrin of the bankers, who currently define the meaning of making bank.
If google's management believes this, then now is the ideal time to take the company public. They will get a good price now for what will be essentially worthless in a few years. They could issue stock for a percentage of the company save the cash (and return to private life after the crash with a few extra billion in the bank), or make an acquisition that will have value later (AOL shareholders made out like bandits getting half of TimeWarner instead of nothing). Besides there will be a ton of pressure on the company to go public, their earlier investors want out, and the investment banks see Google as something like Netscape, a great zooming IPO that could reinvigorate the IPO market when they do go public. Not that it should, but it probably will bring excitement back to an area that thrives on hopes and dreams.
As I understand it, the ball point pen was developed for early pilots, who couldn't use a quill or fountain pen, because they didn't write well, or the ink leaked too often. I think Bic developed them, and got a nice prize from the government at that time.
Don't be so worried about anyone with an HP, they had to teach themselves everything about the calc (because the teacher didn't know how to help them), which usually means they understand the math behind it pretty well. Fear for the TI-82 weilders, who mostly learn button pressing. Alot of math classes and texts are integrating calculators very early on in the program. Go find a middleschooler who actually knows their times tables, they're getting pretty rare.
I am an everyday user of Office, I do use many of the features that most people would accuse of being bloat. Also, I've used Star and Open office (Lotus is still my favorite), and love it once I get the keyboard shortcuts and menu items converted. But I cannot figure out what the point of smart tags is other than to annoy me.
SUN's biggest problem is that they employ a ton of chip (second only to Intel) and system designers to design their systems. As I understand it, Fujitsu develops their own chip compatable with the SPARC architecture. The two companies are now competing with Intel who sells 100 million CPUs a year (Xeon doesn't require a whole lot of R&D beyond a regular P4), in a good year they both might sell 5 million CPUs (I'm not positive about fujitsu's unit volumes) so their cost per chip is significantly higher. Combining these efforts should help both companies reduce costs, by spreading lower development costs over more CPUs, and might help them compete with the new IA-32 based competitors.