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 : Network Appliance -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DownSouth who wrote (3775)	7/22/2000 2:56:50 PM
From: pirate_200	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10934

Business Week just out - Clayton Christensen, page 128 Article about Christensen, his links to George Gilder and information about a "disruptive technology" fund he has helped to create. He lists some storage companies that are his favorites as "disruptive companies" and has Procom, EMC and Veritas in his top 5. "Christensen likes established companies, such as Network Appliance, EMC and Veritas software. He especially favors Procom Technology, in Santa Ana, Calif., which is the fund's largest holding. Procom's innovative storage systems, he says, fit the definition of a promising disruptive technology: They're cheaper and easier to use than similar products performing the same task." (page 130) Later, he says: "Christensen believes Procom is likely to grab business away from EMC, a leader at the high end of the network-appliance market." My comments: this guy (along with Gilder) are insane! 1. Procom has not even produced SPEC SFS benchmarks to show the performance (and stability/scalability etc.) of their servers -- and he considers them a threat to EMC? 2. Veritas partners with virtually every hardware storage vendor to package their software (UI, filesystem and virtual storage subsystem) -- THIS ISN'T DISRUPTIVE -- they are PARTNERS for christsakes! 3. EMC might have been a "disruptive" technology in the early 1990's to IBM and other mainframe storage vendors but they are aren't disrupting anything anymore. Are Gilder and Christensen sitting around a hash pipe contemplating their belly buttons while they create this crap? I think Christensen's book was a milestone when it came out as it documented what disruptive technology can do but I think his strength is documenting history and not predicting the future. As to Gilder, he seems like the Timothy Leary of technology, lots of hot air but not much substance. Over and out...

To: DownSouth who wrote (3775)	7/22/2000 3:24:27 PM
From: Jill	Respond to of 10934

Don't worry, this thread will be just fine. A little bit of discussion of leaps won't hurt it. NTAP is one of those companies that, as I said, doesn't really have enemies or excess hype.

To: DownSouth who wrote (3775)	7/22/2000 4:00:02 PM
From: Lynn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10934

OT Dear Jerry: >I am also concerned that options discussions will take the thread OT. > The NTAP thread has been a very focussed, easy to follow thread > for years. We do have our humorous, OT moments, but nothing too > hard to handle. I hope that we can keep it that way. I share your concern. I personally do not read any of the threads for people interested in options, but I find it really distracting when people have gotten off on option strategy discussions on a few other treads. To me, the company and discussion of the company, what it's doing, where it's going, seems to get pushed to the side, become secondary, while people deal with money making strategies. As a LTB&H only investor, my interest in posting to a thread dominated by options talk is minimal. Even if designated by, "OT," its a form of OT in which only certain people can participate, unlike the OT discussion that has occurred here since I started reading this thread almost 2 years ago. In addition, it swells the postings to a thread such that the non-options postings are harder to find. You are right, Jerry. This has been a really nice thread. I hope it stays that way. Regards, Lynn