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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (115342)	6/10/2000 7:34:00 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571714

Tony Do you have any posts saved that say that? Actually I had a post that I printed out...links can go dead after a period of time.....the website is WallStreetCity.com. The date of the article was January 19, 2000; it was called "Data Banks of the Post-PC Era, Network Attached Storage versus Storage Area Networks"; the author was Chris Connor and it was written under the "Stocks in Focus" section. This guy Connors writes a lot of their net hardware and broadband articles, and seems very knowledgeable at least to someone like me who is technologically challenged. NAS has lots of severe limitations, not the least of which is security. Your data is hanging out there on the public network for anyone to grab. It also has one packet at a time transmission limitations, whereas SAN has no such restrictions. NAS may be OK for low security, low bandwidth applications, which tend to be low storage capacity also. But the power users, like banks, Visa, airlines, insurance cos, etc., won't put anything business critical on NAS. So, I disagree with you, again, at least for the next 5 years, which is like near forever in high tech. :-) He essentially says that NAS is easier to install; easier to operate; and very versatile when compared to SANS. He does not talk about security which I would think is a very valid point. ted