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 : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: getgo234 who wrote (8194)	12/7/1997 11:47:00 AM
From: shane forbes	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

getgo thanks for alerting me to the Business Week articles. I read them. There's an online link: businessweek.com (the writer must be including some UFO's in his 70 billion revenue number. seems just a bit off base to me.) MOT jumping in is no surprise to me - everyone wants in and that's not a good thing unless you have a very high barrier to entry. I used to think these barriers are very very high but now I tend to believe they are just "very high". See NSM - when Halla said he was going to turn that company into a system-on-a-chip company Corrigan scoffed. Well look who's laughing now. I do not know enough about MOT to assess whether they will become successful. But I do know there's a lot of companies offering libraries etc to make system-on-a-chip design a reality. Whenever you see VC firms etc getting into the business of funding companies like these IP library firms you know there's a lot of potential. Having pooh-poohed LSI (again) let me just add that LSI's Core Ware Library was put together over years and just as there are problems in software connecting components together I'm sure stitching together these cores (let alone assembling the cores themselves) must be pretty darn hard. So LSI still has some IP protection here. Yet when companies come in from all over the place saying they want to get into the same arena as LSI and LSI is not showing an ability to preserve market share then we have to admit that there may be a problem. OR we have it all wrong and we should just blame the EDA people for not coming up with better ways to assemble LSI's high density designs efficiently. I lean towards the latter reason - also remember LSI's gate array business is going nowhere. What LSI should do is break down their revenue by these two segments - that way we'll be able to ascertain if their Core Ware libraries do indeed impose a "very high" barrier to entry. I suspect regardless of the design problems their Core Ware based business is nevertheless doing all right. Maybe.