Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (17324)	6/24/1999 4:31:00 PM
From: Stormweaver	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

I guess your point was the price; 70K. You have to remember that this is probably initial pricing and no doubt due to the amount of competition in the x86 iron space and ever decreasing chip prices we'll see this half in no-time at all. If this doesn't send a chill up your SUNW spine then nothing will...

To: Charles Tutt who wrote (17324)	6/24/1999 7:52:00 PM
From: paul	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

Charles, a quote from a MCSE (like the ad says....no computer experience required) doesnt exactly translate into proven 99.9% availability. The dork says its better than a mainframe - like he knows? Its pretty well known that even High End Unix systems arent even at the point of challenging the availability as well as resource utilization and manageability of a mainrame. Thats why theyre still selling very well not only those from IBM but Hitachi and Amdahl as well. Availability is a very complex issue - my PC may not crash running Microsoft Word, but once i use it as a database server its considerably less reliable. Most "9's" marketing is just that...Marketing and typically the 9's are tacked on with services offerings - not improvements in the Hardware or Software. Given Microsofts penchant for marketing im sure they are going to really lay it on thick...Im also curious that most of these announcements about database performance are run on sql*server - how come companies that have been making databases for 20 years cant get anywhere near the same results?? Another case of "DOS aint done till Lotus wont run"?