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 : Applied Materials No-Politics Thread (AMAT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2268)	8/11/2002 3:30:28 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 25522

The piece was from Barrons, correct? Oops never mind, IBD- I missed that. L

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (2268)	8/11/2002 6:14:35 PM
From: Cary Salsberg	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25522

RE: "The fact that the client is now thin means more clients can be supported than before..." I don't understand your logic here. A priori, it would seem that the thinner the client, the more support it requires. RE: "...since moving off c/s to the internet architectures..." I agree that the "internet architecture" will require more chips. That is because it is an efficient model for distributing both data and processing. The thin client artificially limits this. I say artificially, because there is little cost justification for stripped down boxes. Your 3 tiers are just dumb clients attached to servers attached to "backend" data base processing. This is too limited. Mobile devices have and hand held mobile devices will soon have more processing power than envisioned for thin clients.