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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rudedog who wrote (168026)	12/9/2001 9:18:05 PM
From: John Koligman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Rude, the 'glitter' of those magical gains dies pretty hard for many <ggg>. The Fortune data I used in my prior post was also summarized in a post on the EMC thread. The comment on the 1940's being an era of superb GDP growth while the market did nothing was quite interesting... Regards, John The U.S. Never Stopped Growing Per capita GNP gains crept in the 20th century's early years. But if you think of the U.S. as a stock, it was overall one helluva mover. 20th-Century growth in per capita GNP Year (constant dollars) 1900-10 29% 1910-20 1% 1920-30 13% 1930-40 21% 1940-50 50% 1950-60 18% 1960-70 33% 1970-80 24% 1980-90 24% 1990-2000 24% ......At its beginning, for example, between 1900 and 1920, the country was chugging ahead, explosively expanding its use of electricity, autos, and the telephone. Yet the market barely moved, recording a 0.4% annual increase that was roughly analogous to the slim pickings between 1964 and 1981. • Dow Industrials Dec. 31, 1899: 66.08 Dec. 31, 1920: 71.95 In the next period, we had the market boom of the '20s, when the Dow jumped 430% to 381 in September 1929. Then we go 19 years--19 years--and there is the Dow at 177, half the level where it began. That's true even though the 1940s displayed by far the largest gain in per capita GDP (50%) of any 20th-century decade. Following that came a 17-year period when stocks finally took off--making a great five-to-one gain. And then the two periods discussed at the start: stagnation until 1981, and the roaring boom that wrapped up this amazing century. To break things down another way, we had three huge, secular bull markets that covered about 44 years, during which the Dow gained more than 11,000 points. And we had three periods of stagnation, covering some 56 years. During those 56 years the country made major economic progress and yet the Dow actually lost 292 points. How could this have happened? In a flourishing country in which people are focused on making money, how could you have had three extended and anguishing periods of stagnation that in aggregate--leaving aside dividends--would have lost you money? The answer lies in the mistake that investors repeatedly make--that psychological force I mentioned above: People are habitually guided by the rear-view mirror and, for the most part, by the vistas immediately behind them. The first part of the century offers a vivid illustration of that myopia. In the century's first 20 years, stocks normally yielded more than high-grade bonds. That relationship now seems quaint, but it was then almost axiomatic. Stocks were known to be riskier, so why buy them unless you were paid a premium? And then came along a 1924 book--slim and initially unheralded, but destined to move markets as never before--written by a man named Edgar Lawrence Smith. The book, called Common Stocks as Long Term Investments, chronicled a study Smith had done of security price movements in the 56 years ended in 1922. Smith had started off his study with a hypothesis: Stocks would do better in times of inflation, and bonds would do better in times of deflation. It was a perfectly reasonable hypothesis. But consider the first words in the book: "These studies are the record of a failure--the failure of facts to sustain a preconceived theory." Smith went on: "The facts assembled, however, seemed worthy of further examination. If they would not prove what we had hoped to have them prove, it seemed desirable to turn them loose and to follow them to whatever end they might lead." Now, there was a smart man, who did just about the hardest thing in the world to do. Charles Darwin used to say that whenever he ran into something that contradicted a conclusion he cherished, he was obliged to write the new finding down within 30 minutes. Otherwise his mind would work to reject the discordant information, much as the body rejects transplants. Man's natural inclination is to cling to his beliefs, particularly if they are reinforced by recent experience--a flaw in our makeup that bears on what happens during secular bull markets and extended periods of stagnation....... fortune.com.

To: rudedog who wrote (168026)	12/10/2001 10:31:49 AM
From: John Koligman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

Looks like even Dell had a revenue drop according to IDC... Regards, John Dismal server market bruises IBM least By Stephen Shankland Staff Writer, CNET News.com December 9, 2001, 1:15 p.m. PT The server market plunged 30 percent in the third quarter of 2001, with No. 1 IBM the least damaged and Hewlett-Packard edging to within a fraction of Sun's lead in the key Unix server segment. The total server market dropped from $15.2 billion in the third quarter of 2000 to $10.7 billion in the third quarter of 2001, research firm IDC said in a report Friday. In the overall market, IBM sales dropped 6.1 percent to $2.8 billion, but its market share rose 6.5 percent. Much of that gain took place at the expense of rival Sun Microsystems, which lost 6.3 percent of market share and saw revenue plunge 53 percent to $1.3 billion, according to IDC. Servers are the powerful computers that handle chores on corporate networks such as keeping track of all the sales of airplane tickets. The systems are expensive, with top-end models often costing well over $1 million, and sales of servers tends to tow along sales of a company's other products and services. Sun, which specializes in the Unix servers that make up the largest part of the overall market, had been ascendant in 2000, but lumbering IBM mustered a response and now is carving back sales from Sun. Meanwhile, HP, once the top Unix server seller, is fighting back as well, and IDC said the company is within a hair's breadth of reclaiming the lead. In the Unix market, Sun had 28.8 percent of the market in the third quarter, with sales of $1.33 billion. HP had 28.5 percent with sales of $1.31 billion, IDC said. IBM, in third place, had $960 million in sales for 20.9 percent of the market. In the overall market, Compaq Computer was in second place with 16.3 percent of the market and a revenue drop of 34.7 percent to $1.75 billion. HP was in third place with 15.2 percent and revenue that dropped 29.7 percent to $1.64 billion. Dell, in fifth place with 7.9 percent of the market, had a revenue drop of 5.8 percent--the smallest of the top companies--with revenue of $847 million.

To: rudedog who wrote (168026)	12/10/2001 5:38:04 PM
From: kemble s. matter	Respond to of 176387

Rudedog, Hi!! I'm only using the quotes I hear from Michael...I made a few dollars listening to him in the past...I'm sure he has made plans to sell more than the PC's...Many have doubted his plans for sometime now...Many corporations competing against him have likewise...They keep doubting he can continue being successful in various markets...He says that this is perhaps his greatest advantage... Best, Kemble

To: rudedog who wrote (168026)	1/10/2002 11:21:07 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 176387

How Microsoft plans to put the PC at the heart of your home By David Coursey, AnchorDesk January 8, 2002 9:00 PM PT zdnet.com LAS VEGAS--It's too early to tell how Microsoft will fare in its attempt to make personal computers the hub of a digital home, but I like what I've seen so far. Microsoft, which introduced a collection of new Windows XP "experiences" code-named Freestyle, and a new, wireless, tablet-like PC named Mira at the Consumer Electronics Show here, seems to be moving slowly, pushing consumers only as far as they appear ready to go. This step-by-step approach, which we've already seen in Windows's support for audio and photography, takes things power users are already doing and makes them accessible to the masses. In some cases, it does this in a way that angers other companies, such as RealNetworks and Kodak, which see Microsoft as invading their turf. But as far as users like you and me are concerned, the overall effect is positive. FREESTYLE BUILDS on the current digital photography, home video, and music features of Windows XP. It would, by way of example, make it possible for you to use your PC to record and play back TV shows, just as the new generation of digital video recorders does (see screenshot, below). For its part, the Mira is a portable unit that would allow you to access your PC, your TV, or your game player from any place you please. By adding support for such a remote control device and creating a new user interface intended for use with the remote and at a distance from the PC, Microsoft is extending the PC's reach from the desktop to the couch or easy chair across the room. Microsoft believes people would like to play their PC music, watch movies, or view photographs while sitting someplace other than in front of the keyboard. Not everyone will want to do this, of course, and even those who do won't want to do it on all their machines. But Microsoft seems to be on a path toward making these features a universal part of the operating system, available on all XP boxes. I am expecting--and pushing Microsoft to offer--a collection of free XP updates that will make these features available to all users as quickly as possible. WHILE THE NEW Freestyle feature for recording and playing back television programs may not be attractive to many users right now, it will be soon. I expect that, by next Christmas, most mid- to high-level consumer PCs will come equipped with a TV tuner (and remote control). Customers who want to upgrade would be able to buy add-ons for their current machines. This video support puts Windows XP into direct competition with stand-alone devices from TiVo, Replay, Dish Networks, and even Microsoft's own UltimateTV. Perhaps tellingly, Microsoft has committed to offering its TV program guide free of charge. TiVo and UltimateTV customers have to pay for this information. For the record, Microsoft is not expecting many XP home users to immediately connect their PCs to their music systems and TV sets, just because these new features appear. Real integration of the PC into the home entertainment environment will come later, perhaps as devices based on Microsoft's newly announced Windows CE.Net operating system begin to arrive this summer. Or maybe not. We are inevitably headed to a time when the now-disparate components of your home entertainment complex--TVs, DVDs, DVRs, VCRs, stereos, PCs, game consoles--will start working together, somehow, some way. Microsoft sees Freestyle/Windows XP and Windows CE.Net as key components to making that happen. But that does not necessarily mean that you will embrace its vision. MICROSOFT CLEARLY NEEDS to support other standards as the entertainment industry and other component makers decide what they'll do. So if Windows CE.Net doesn't conquer the world--and I am not expecting it will--the XP-based home computer must learn to talk to whatever devices are out there. Of course, it is not a foregone conclusion that the PC will dominate the home environment in the way it already does the office world. And this Consumer Electronics Show has already seen the introduction of a potentially formidable competitor, the new Moxi device created by WebTV founder Steve Perlman. Moxi's all-in-one approach, offering a variety of entertainment devices in a single package, would do most, if not all, of what Microsoft wants a PC to do. These approaches--Microsoft's and Moxi's, as well as a number of others I expect to see--don't have to be mutually exclusive. So let me set some benchmarks for Microsoft in its efforts to move the PC to center stage in home entertainment: Baby steps. Microsoft needs to move slowly and not get ahead of customers' ability to accept and implement change, or of PC hardware and peripheral makers' ability to provide devices that work with the new features. Universality. The new features need to be available to any Windows device--and I mean any--that can support them. While all users won't use all features, and some won't use any, universal availability means people can easily teach their friends to use features they didn't even know they had. Free. Freestyle and other XP enhancements need to be free. In fact, the add-ons need to be done in a way that adds nothing to the cost of a new PC. The key to getting people to adopt this new technology is to make it as painless as possible. It just needs to show up in their lives in usable form. Playing well with others. Microsoft will not be able to force-feed Windows CE.Net (or anything else) to all the companies that need to build products that interface with the home PC of the future. Microsoft must be inclusive, but the consumer electronics industry needs to accept Microsoft's ownership of the PC platform and try to play along, too. And this means that Microsoft and companies that would use something instead of a PC to support next-generation home applications also need to learn to play together. Christmas 2002. That's when Microsoft needs to make this happen. If Microsoft doesn't have Freestyle-enabled PCs (and add-ons for existing machines) widely available at popular prices in time for holiday shoppers, it will have failed an important test. This is a fairly complex topic, and it isn't at all clear how it will play out. I am certain that the PC will play a greater role in home entertainment and information, just as I am certain there will be a number of other devices and approaches trying to do the same thing.