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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (67638)	9/14/1999 4:21:00 PM
From: Harry Landsiedel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

Rudedog. Re: "Kumar seems a little out of his depth here. Thanx for your very informative post. If 4-way and 8-way is the key battle area, CPQ should be able to hold its own. Re: "NT is a couple of years away from high reliability except in those carefully controlled configurations above." How big a negative is this for CPQ? Is this part of the reason for their push behind Tru64? Kumar also predicted: " If you look at the multitude of UNIX flavors, the dominant players are Sun's Solaris and then Tru64 from Compaq (CPQ), Hewlett-Packard's (HWP) UX, and IBM's AIX, and Monterrey, which is IBM's relationship with Santa Cruz Operation's (SCOC) operating system, and then finally you have Linux. Clearly, there isn't enough support for all these flavors. When the dust settles, there will be two or three players left standing. One will be Solaris, and we think there will be Monterrey, and then we think there will be Linux." Do you agree? It seems to me that HP's UX would be a player too, BWDIK Do you see any vulnerability for CPQ here? HL

To: rudedog who wrote (67638)	9/14/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: paul	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

"...SUN sold less than 1000 UE10000 systems so far this year..." If you listened to Sun's conference calls they are basically capacity constrained on building more Starfires - now assuming the avg selling price of a Starfire is around a million dollars including startup services and support that translates to about a billion dollars a year and i suspect the profit margins are pretty healthy in this space vs. 4-8 way servers - seems like real money to me. Also Starfires drag in lots of other infrastructure from redundant servers to applications consulting for Oracle, SAP, etc. Kumar's point seems to be that the internet is putting a exclamation point on scalability and reliablity and NT doesnt deliver any of these - the 99.9 guarantees are mostly built around having various services to replace NT systems when they go down - not in any intrinsic availability of NT.