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 : HWP -- Hewlett Packard -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fred Levine who wrote (3386)	2/24/2000 9:16:00 AM
From: J Fieb	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4722

Anyone in the know about HWP and storage? They severed ties to EMC and went with HDS, but this Yahoo post suggests all is not well......... Traject by: Muldher 2/24/00 8:57 am Msg: 29598 of 29598 HP and MTI? Certainly a possibility as the HP/HDS relationship has been souring for the last three months (HDS won't open up their technology to HP). Some Japanese tech. companies are just too difficult to work with as a "partner". HP needs a storage line and MTI is the only real option left, JMHO. Any help out there?? Thanks in advance.

To: Fred Levine who wrote (3386)	3/1/2000 1:33:00 AM
From: BelowTheCrowd	Respond to of 4722

Fred, I've been away for a bit, but I do have some comments about the digital cameras. > 1) Altho I have 2 million pixels, I want more. I agree. And the bulk of the money is being made by the companies which make and sell the imaging components, not the camera makers who are in a pretty brutal market. I just recently evaluated different cameras and found the HP's to come up short, but that is of course just one opinion, based on a specific set of needs. They generally seem nice. Incidentally, one of the most critical components is the operating software. I have not been impressed with the software which HP uses (Digita?), which is also employed by Minolta and a few others. JPEGs are lower quality than my Kodak, particularly in difficult lighting situations. > 2) My new 433 computer is now too slow. Every time I read a comment like this, I am reminded of what a great job my former former employer (Intel) has done in convincing the world that the only thing that matters on a computer is processor speed. For digital imaging I'd be happy with a 433MHz processor, a super-fast video adapter, a fast hard drive and TONS of memory. Much better than getting the latest and greatest 800MHz processor packaged with "typical" components. (One of my two computers is a 300MHz Pentium II. By upgrading the components (video, HDD) to a quality beyond what is normal in a "consumer" PC, I have managed very good performance from it on all graphics-related tasks. That said, you're right. It'll sell computers. Though I wonder if the customers will really be happy with the performance boost (or lack therof) which they get. > 3) I need a new and expensive printer. Sure do. > 4) This uses a lot of ink cartridges. Which, from a profit standpoint, is even more important than the printer. Just like razor blades. Equally important is the high-quality photo paper, which is also HP-branded. (Although there are competitors for paper, not ink cartridges.) > 5) I want to send the pict via internet and this also requires a faster computer. Your internet connection is governed ENTIRELY by the speed of your connection. If you've got a 56K modem, that's the best speed you'll get, no matter how fast the computer. Of course, many people do believe otherwise and it continues to help selling boxes. Realistically, my mom's old 200MHz Pentium is just as good for internet stuff as any newer, faster machine. A new modem got her up to the same speeds I can achieve with my twin-PIII, twin-SCSI, RAID-equipped, NT workstation... The only solution is broadband. DSL or cable. Which has nothing to do with the computer, and even then is still the critical chokepoint in the network. (Yes, DSL is on order in the Gat household...) 6) I like the camera, and so will millions of others. Therefore, Hewlitt Packard, Intel, and of course, AMAT will benefit big time. Most certainly true. Especially true for the printer side of HP. I will note one more thing that the camera makers REALLY need to work on, and that's battery life. With my first digital I figured that I was spending twice as much on Duracells as I might have spent on film for my Nikon! It's gotten a little bit better, and Kodak is now packaging their cameras with high-capacity NiMH's and a charger. Combining those with my SOP of "display screen always off" I can go for more than 100 images before a charge. Turn on the display screen and they're dead really fast. mg