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 : Seagate Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: roger held who wrote (3977)	10/31/1997 10:35:00 AM
From: mattie	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 7841

Thread, went to the Seagate annual meeting in Aptos yesterday. Some items that came out of the Q&A: they are not interested in buying more of Sandisk. It appears they consider IBM a bigger threat than qntm and wdc - IBM is vertically integrated - the others are not. They are intent in boosting shareholder value - one direct way is to beef up their software division, which has grown 53% annually for the past couple of years - and possibly do an IPO in 1998. Asian currencey problems may benefit them by lowering their costs in Singapore. They also are trying to boost brand awareness. They have developed some TV commercials that they showed us...look for them in the coming year. Thats about it - short meeting 45 min - only 50 people or so. Saegate is a good buy at these levels.

To: roger held who wrote (3977)	11/3/1997 7:52:00 PM
From: JoeBiker	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 7841

Roger said: "Number of platters only addresses the TPI (tracks per inch) portion of areal density. " Number of platters has nothing to do with tracks per inch. Tracks per inch is exactly that. On a typical 3.5" disk, we use from about .86" to 1.76" radius, give or take. Tracks per inch is the number of tracks we have for every inch of radius, so for a drive that has, say 6000 tracks, average tpi is 4000/(1.76-.86) = 6.67Ktpi. I say average because the actuator travels in an arc, which makes actual tpi vary with radius. "Thus even with the same number of platters, the drive has higher areal density, thus higher performance. Yes, the GB/platter is the same, but SEG still has higher areal density." This would only be true if Seagate is "short-stroking" the drive, thus using less of the usable area of each surface (the outside, where performance is higher), and making up for the capacity loss with greater areal density. This is not a common technique, and I'd be surprised to find out they're doing this. Do you have confirmed information? Keep in mind that areal density is bits per square inch. Assuming brand A's platters use the same number of square inches as brand B's, and both have the same capacity per platter, they both have the same average areal density. However, it's also possible (and likely) that a given areal density was achieved with a different combination of track and linear bit density (bpi) on brand A than brand B, and therefore has different performance characteristics. Furthermore, achieving a given areal density with greater linear bit density and lesser track density would likely give greater performance. Is this what you were trying to say?