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 : WDC/Sandisk Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam who wrote (33625)	9/30/2006 2:56:03 PM
From: inaflash	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 60323

My take on the last answer. Samsung lacks the incentive to bring the "flash top" to marekt too soon. They are leveraged to the DRAM biz, already ramped up for that production, and enjoy decent market share of HD laptops. Most important it does not have SNDK's IP and R&D dept. It depends on it when it comes to flash. They're being realistic about the need for a 32GB flash drive costing $1000 versus 200GB hard drive costing $200. Though the gap is closing, it's not closing that fast. The average company isn't going to go flash at these prices. What works in favor for the average road warrior where this tradeoff might take place is that not all need (or necessarily want) to use 200GB on the road. Would you want 200GB of your companies databases on all your employees hard drives? Those whose work mainly involves Word/Excel/Powerpoint could most likely live with 32GB (I'd even argue 16GB is sufficient for some), and having half the weight and twice the battery life (say 2 pounds and 8 hours) would be more desirable than more hard drive capacity. The power users will still require hard drives and fast processors, as weight and battery life become lower priorities.