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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ausdauer who wrote (9356)	2/28/2000 9:01:00 AM
From: rll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

" I think the jury is still out as to whether it will be a cost effective replacement for storage applications where arguments about the limitation of flash w/r/t write speed and cell endurance are not relevant based on the current state-of-the-art." Aus, With all due respect, we're talking about the future here not current state-of-the-art. Although present memory transfer time-delays for high resolution digicams are annoying at least. rll

To: Ausdauer who wrote (9356)	2/28/2000 9:24:00 AM
From: quidditch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 60323

Aus, on storage, you know far more than I do on this subject and I respect your assessment. The only reply I could offer up--and this is not in defense of OUM per se (as my position in SNDK is larger than that of ENER)--is that I recall discussion on this thread a while ago among the digital camera bugs here, Art, you and maybe Binx, on the write speed of some of the higher resolution cameras and whether a dedicated shutter bug would find the write speed a deterrent to full support of digital photography in the rapid shoot environment. On ENER's NiMH I should PM. Best, Steve