<...Why doesn't anyone with doubts want to be identified? Kachina seems to have doubts, and he is anonymous. His friends and relatives quoted are anonymous. You are anonymous,..>
I have no axe to grind with SR, and have only partly kept up with this thread. And while it's easy enough to say that everyone on SI is anonymous, please feel free to email me. BTW, I note that you joined SI recently for the purpose of posting about SR, and have only posted on this thread. Also, while being congenial (and IMO overly humble in your technical understanding), have only taken issue with critical opinions. My strong suspicion is that you are somehow associated with SR, either as a principal, employee, fund-raiser or PR. If so (and I *do* believe it is), this is great as perhaps you can come out of the closet and add to our understanding of what this company offers in real world applications.
<..as is your friend at K.P...>
He is one of the predominant VC partners in the Valley, and if he looked at SR (which he did), it's safe to presume he did so under NDAs. And while I've given enough info for him to be reasonably guessed, I don't feel at liberty to put his name or any specific comments in print (which I hasten to add were NOT represented, by him OR myself, as definitive) - sorry. Anyone not sufficiently acquainted with my SI posting history to handicap my comments, by all means feel free to discount them as much as necessary.
<..I like to hear what people think, both good and bad, to help me analyze the viability of SR's technology. It just doesn't carry as much weight (with me at least) when it's posed as "I heard someone say......"...>
Understood completely.
<..One of the reasons for my guarded optimism about this company is that no identified, credible source has said their technology doesn't work almost 7 months after the public unveiling of their technology...>
Well, I question your "public unveiling" argument. Has SR given their tech to an independent lab for a battery of rigorous canned and *real-world-condition* testing? If not (and I don't know but don't think so), I think your argument is somewhat misleading.
and regarding Message 8412207
Lucent's CTO Bob Martin (who is a BIG Clayton Christensen fan - will this arbitrage the red/blue zone differential as "Lucents" now look to be involved in disruption?) is talking about 50 THz (on 1K lambdas) on a single fiber with 2:1 single channel efficiency (vs LU's BLAST program which has achieved MUCH higher - up to 1000x - channel efficiency by going beyond the Shannon single-channel approach) by 2005. Martin claims that 400Gbps (over 80 lambdas) is available and DEPLOYED today. Anyway, didn't sound like slideware to me.
And for Christensen fans, Bob will be featured on a panel in Memphis. |
