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 : Semi Equipment Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: etchmeister who wrote (29164)	3/9/2006 1:01:29 AM
From: etchmeister	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95737

3) "The technology scales way up," said Maloney. "It just comes down to what's the cost curve on NAND." At some point, he said, there is the potential of running a PC's entire operating system from NAND instead of from the hard drive, where it currently resides. To: slacker711 who wrote (31506) 3/8/2006 9:32:40 PM From: inaflash Read Replies (1) of 31522 1) Intel will put NAND flash chips into notebook PCs beginning next year. Maloney said Intel was very interested in the use of NAND flash in mobile devices as well as in PCs. The Santa Rosa platform, an updated version of the company's popular Centrino brand, is scheduled for release in the first quarter of 2007, according to Maloney. 2) Maloney demonstrated the advantages of flash technology in PCs, by booting up two PCs on stage, one with flash, and the other without. The PC with flash booted up in about half the time. The flash-based PC also consumed slightly less power. According to Maloney, the demonstration PC had 256 megabytes of NAND flash "under the hood." But he said it was still unclear how much flash would be incorporated into the Santa Rosa platform. 3) "The technology scales way up," said Maloney. "It just comes down to what's the cost curve on NAND." At some point, he said, there is the potential of running a PC's entire operating system from NAND instead of from the hard drive, where it currently resides. 1) It's impressive that 256MB has such an effect, but half the time isn't fast enough. I'd say "instant boot" needs to be under 3 seconds, but I'm guessing anything less than 10 seconds will be called that by the marketing folks. The cost of 256MB today is negligible. Would you pay an extra $10 for your laptop to have the instant boot feature? By 2007/8, the minimum you'll be looking at is 1GB. A good rule of thumb might be a 1:1 DRAM:FLASH as a low end, and I expect 1GB to be the common DRAM size by then. A better ratio will be 1:2 or 1:4 to give room for quick sleep/hibernate/wakeup modes and applications quick starts. An extra $20-50 is not a big deal on a $1000+ laptop, but we'll probably not see it on the low end. 2) The "slightly less power" will be interesting to see if it scales as well if there was a significantly larger amount of flash for those users that want to stretch out the battery life. An extra 30 minutes or 1 hour would be significant and potentially achievable if the hard drive can be spun down a good percentage of the time. If I'm on a flight editing a Word or Excel document and it's all residing on flash, I don't have to touch the hard drive. 3) "The technology scales way up" - is there a limit? As long as costs keep coming down faster than HD, someday, the limit will be the same as HD for some people; get the biggest you can afford or the biggest they build. Not mentioned was the speed improvement of flash over hard drive. The overall system performance of a slightly slower CPU with flash versus faster CPU without flash may be comparable, especially in applications with lots of HD reads. People pay hundreds more for a little improvement in CPU performance that doesn't really add that much to overall system performance. This could prove to be a better overall value as far as system improvement.

To: etchmeister who wrote (29164)	3/9/2006 7:55:13 AM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 95737

etch, sometimes the anticipating crowd guesses wrong. Look at AMAT reaching almost $30 in 2001. The anticipated rise in SEMI bookings never came, price dropped to below $14 and the next anticipatory up move was a correct guess. briefcase.yahoo.com the chart name is SEMIbookings_AMAT.gif

To: etchmeister who wrote (29164)	3/9/2006 8:38:32 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 95737

etch, Re: I believe yearly highs have been put in (as you know I was probably one of the most bullish posters in 2005 but change my mind Does this mean you are out of the SCE's entirely? Curious. Brian

To: etchmeister who wrote (29164)	3/9/2006 9:22:40 AM
From: auriculatus	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 95737

Hi etch, I fully agree (even though it makes me cringe) with your assessment. The bookings vs. pps chart is very clear. And the steep drop after AMAT's great outlook seems to indicate that the big manipulators look at the same chart as well. Still riding NVLS and quite afraid that it will not regain 27.5. This sector has got to be the most counter-cyclical when it comes to pps versus earnings. It is the one where the big boys have mastered the art to get the masses in at the highs since all outlooks are super positive right now and based on INTC's capacity constrains and TSMC's util rate, numbers by the SECs should be good going forward. Yet these stocks will most likely start a very long slide. The weak hands will then sell out as the business gets worse, just when these stocks hit their lows. Awful sector to navigate. Once I get out of NVLS, I will play elsewhere, trust me. Send me a not if you have some time.