SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : VALENCE TECHNOLOGY (VLNC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)2/29/2000 10:01:00 PM
From: Rich Wolf  Respond to of 27311
 
John, Yes, Pallisard had raised that topic. Over on yahoo, DennisV confirmed that it wouldn't be available until Sep'00. If you go to Dennis Roth's website, and go back to the timeframe of last fall's expo in Japan, there's news about Sharp's entry. As I described in a post (here or on yahoo?), the cells are the same format as the large Valence cells (4x5" or so, laid out in a flat array of 4 cells, to make a battery to power the laptop). The cells are the result of a joint partnership between Sharp and Hitachi-Maxell. No further information is available at this time.

Rich



To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)2/29/2000 10:02:00 PM
From: David Maginnis  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 27311
 
I called Ultalife about that last week and they said that the battery was made by Hitachi. I don't know if the following is the battery

hitachi.com

or if it is made by someone else?



To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)2/29/2000 10:42:00 PM
From: eli74  Respond to of 27311
 
John, I read about something similar to that in PC World several months back (last summer?). Brief write-up in the new product section. (Please don't embarrass me by asking me any more details). Anyway, the article was unclear about whether this whizzbang was li-ion or li-polymer, or what the chemistry was.



To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)3/1/2000 12:13:00 AM
From: Pallisard  Respond to of 27311
 
Yes, I printed it last week, and Rich Wolf gave a very lucid explanation. See last week's posts.



To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)3/1/2000 1:39:00 AM
From: Bob Childers  Respond to of 27311
 
Hi John-

I did see that, but...
.88 lbs is not "elegant"
FWIW

Cheers to all - Bob



To: John Curtis who wrote (18473)3/1/2000 1:40:00 AM
From: Bob Childers  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 27311
 
Hi John-

I did see that, but...
.88 lbs is not "elegant"

Cheers to all - Bob