Harvard Shouldn't Have Bowed to Intel's Whim

To the editors:

Regarding Intel's recent sponsorship of the Internet and health conference, and its request that Harvard cover up the iMac computer kiosks (News, June 5): The University should have been tougher. You don't "accomodate" a sponsor at the expense of the students. Not a monetary decision? Right. Or perhaps Intel threatened to yank Andy Grove from his appeareance.

The Intel representative didn't intend the iMacs to become unusable by covering them? Sure. Shame on the University's lack of common sense. The students are Harvard's clientele, not Intel.

David Deckert

Jasper, Ga.

June 11, 2000

Brute Force Techniques

To the editors:

Intel has some business! Maybe Intel should have been part of the Microsoft justice suit, or one of their own. They sure can throw their weight around, especially when no one has the fortitude to stand up to their intimidation. How petty and paranoid can a company be that avoids competition in the halls of higher education?

Just try covering a PC for the same reason if Apple were to visit. Bet you never would. Harvard has fallen far.

Steve Baca

June 8, 2000

The iMac Revolution

To the editors:

Why is it that, somehow, I think that if Apple was the sponsor and Intel had the kiosks, Apple wouldn't have been so paranoid as to demand such a stipulation as covering and unplugging anything. Yet, as a dedicated Mac user, I can't help but feel a bit giddy and pleased that Intel made such a demand based on fear of market trends and the success of iMacs, and Macs in general. Get used to it, Intel.

Jerry K. Musser

Columbia, Pa.

June 10, 2000

Knafel Plans Missed Resident Review

To the editors:

To say that "residents" lauded the new design for the Knafel Center (News, June 5) misrepresents the Mid Cambridge Neighborhood Conservation District Commission proceedings on May 30. While it is true that several of the commissioners (who are all "residents") applauded Harry Cobb's new design, the residents attending the hearing were given no opportunity to react to the proposal.

And while the new proposal (which was presented in only the most general terms) does address some issues of design and massing raised by neighbors, it does not begin to address an issue we have been trying to put on the table for three years: An academic center with classrooms, library and conference facilities, serving the largest department in the college, does not belong immediately adjacent to a residential neighborhood. We are concerned about the impact cars, trucks, bicycles and pedestrians will have on already-overcrowded streets and parking areas, particularly given the University's stated intention to use the building for Extension School classes in the evenings and conferences on weekends. Until the fundamental program is altered to reduce the impact of use of this building on the neighborhood, we will not be praising any architectural design.

Laura Roberts

June 5, 2000

The writer is a Cambridge city resident.