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 : e.Digital Corporation(EDIG) - Embedded Digital Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bob who wrote (10045)	1/27/2000 3:04:00 AM
From: gerald tseng	Respond to of 18366

bob: Sure cAPSLOCK is not interested in anything other than MP3. He is a freelance musician according to his profile, and MP3 is good for him........If he become famous one day, he would want other format that's DRMed.

To: bob who wrote (10045)	1/27/2000 3:02:00 PM
From: cAPSLOCK	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 18366

Yes, your Diamond Rio (soon to be defunct) handles file management just fine for one codec and no DRM. Why will my Diamond RIO ever be defunct as you say? It will always perform exactly as it did when I bought it. Well if I drop it from my bicycle many more times you might be right... ;) Believe me, I understand the industry and where it is headed. I understand that superior codecs will come along, although I have not heard one yet. I understand that the music sellers, and to a lesser extent the artists are looking to watermarking etc to protect their copyrighted material. I think I can answer why the consumer would want something other than mp3 in their device... BECAUSE NONE OF THE MAJOR MUSIC LABELS WILL BE ENCODING THEIR MUSIC WITH THIS CODEC. I think I can refute this answer with a simple argument. NONE OF THE MAJOR MUSIC LABELS ARE ENCODING THEIR MUSIC WITH THIS CODEC EVEN NOW. But people still favour mp3. Gosh, I hate all caps.. ;) Ironic isn't it? regards, cAPSLOCK

To: bob who wrote (10045)	1/27/2000 3:57:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Respond to of 18366

Correct me if I'm wrong bob, but INTC chose to work with EDIG in 1998. They have provided a measly $39k to EDIG - way back then and nothing more. IMO INTC found EDIG to be a failure. That means since 1998 INTC and EDIG got nuttn done? I think the long pumpers use this old failed INTC relationship to bolster EDIG's credibility, when reality seems to show the relationship was and is a failure. Please feel free to correct me bob Cheers

To: bob who wrote (10045)	1/27/2000 4:02:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Respond to of 18366

bob, Here's a report that discussed the seemingly failed INTC deal with EDIG... Please point out the wrong parts of this report... 1800adviser.com ****************************************** The agreement with Intel was signed in August 1998. Intel was supposedly designing and making prototypes which uses E.Digital's technology known as MicroOS. The prototype was expected during 1999 and to our understanding, it has yet to be delivered nor has the scope of the contract with Intel been extended. In fact, Intel has only spent $39,000 in this regards. Just recently, Skip Matthews, the Intel manager of marketing audio applications, Flash Memory, recently retired and joined the Board of E.Digital. Despite the possibilities, as of this date, Intel has not invested any funds into this Company.