That extra inventory was used to build systems in the first quarter, so that accounts for some of the revenue drop.
Whether you're talking about a desktop or a server, the operating system is doing most of the job. The application just tells the operating system to go do something, so anything you do to make the operating system faster makes the whole process faster.
You are comparing an old system and old implementation against a new system and new implementation. I am sure this was one of the better examples that Intel found in its customer base.
The P-III is an evolutionary advance, not a revolutionary one.
What I expect will happen is that this turns into a pretty aggressive battle between the two companies.
This is definitely moving their products into a different segment. The product is targeted at a pretty good segment of the PC market right now.
This is the first major architectural change they've done in about five years, and it should result in them being significantly more competitive.
There's been lot of expansion happening in the notebook computing space. That has helped Intel quite a bit, but they need to have something new if they are going to maintain their presence.
It might add a little urgency to efforts that are already under way.
These things will show how they are working to make PCs fit better into the home entertainment universe.
Intel constantly plows money into R&D and new production capabilities. The smaller firms just can't compete on their own, so alliances make sense.
By contrast, AMD has a single road on their map. At some point in the future, everything they manufacture will be 64-bit, and the technology will proliferate down from servers into PCs.
The important part about the server market is that the chips tend to sell for more, and so being successful there, in AMD's case, produces more resources that can be used in the desktop market.