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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (107595)	8/15/2000 3:31:48 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten, >Jozef, <There are countless servers out there sitting idle, with occasional hit. A lot of these n-way servers are laboring with insufficient RAM. A lot of them are sitting idle, waiting for the occasional hit.> That seems to go against what Craig Barrett suggested, that only 5% of the required server capacity to deal with the ever-expanding Internet is currently deployed. Joe apparently knows of websites or other applications for servers that just don't get hit very often. Maybe some of the dotcoms that have been going out of business would fall into that category. The Yahoos, Ebays, Amazons, as well as the Ciscos, Dells and Intels of the world that do so much on line business are pretty busy in transaction count, on their servers, however. Interesting point I just thought of in that regard: on the Cisco thread, some of the high tech bears were making a case for weeks, about 2 months or so ago, that all the dotcoms that have been failing would result in a big loss in sales for the Internet infrastructure companies. So, Cisco, and I would guess Sun, EMC, Nortel, etc., should all start to lose sales and their stock prices go way down. Well, those bears were wrong again, at least on the business side. What they failed to take the time to learn is that the Fortune 500, 1000, whatever, companies are the biggest users of the net, by far, and they're falling all over themselves establishing their net presence. Off the soapbox. Tony

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (107595)	8/15/2000 8:31:16 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Tenchusatsu, For sites like Amazon (that face the challenges of scalability) there are hundreds if not thousands that can that are barely accessed. In corporate environment, you have many servers out there that are being used by a handful of users, infrequently, with minimum load. I see a lot of PPro 200 servers out there, some dual with 128 MB of RAM. I can't help but wonder if the ever increasing power of the CPUs will not slow down the growth of the exotic (100,000 to multimillion) servers. Your single CPU server based on 1 GHz CPU with GB+ RAM can outrun a good percentage of the exotic servers from just 1 or 2 years ago. As far as the business requirements of the corporations deploying these servers, I don't think the requirements grow at the same exponential rate as the power of the microprocessors. I do a lot ow work with databases, and I find it amazing how much you can get out of single CPU box with sufficient memory. But you won't find many companies advertising this. Joe