If developers don't make the transition to Apple and Intel, they'll probably be making the transition to Windows and Intel. Intel doesn't have a lot to lose.

I assume Scott will paint it as things are back on track and the company is in good hands, but I think the reality is he would have preferred to have waited until the financial results were really there.

I don't think anybody knows exactly what the end result of open sourcing the chip technology is.

I don't think Microsoft had much choice in the matter. The bottom line is there is not a whole lot of market to buy that product from Microsoft.

In the sense of having this ongoing awareness of and feedback mechanism, it does mirror certain elements of open source development. If not openness of code and standards, there is greater visibility into what's going on. Customers have visibility more than an ability to necessarily influence Microsoft greatly.

Intel has inconsistently put energy into storage. It hasn't had a real comprehensive strategy in the past.

Intel has shown preliminary benchmarks that backup their general statements about performance. Based on what I have seen, there is not reason to think the products will not live up to their billing.

Intel let a competitor sneak into a market where they weren't before. Still, it was hard to believe that AMD would be able to maintain the kind of performance lead that they have enjoyed over the past one to two years.

Intel woke up from its frequency delusion and is now going full-bore on dual-core.

Sun has given a speed boost to its installed base as the company focuses on x64 systems and the forthcoming Niagara processor,