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 : TAVA Technologies (TAVA-NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike Winn who wrote (8029)	12/30/1997 11:12:00 AM
From: jan m.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 31646

Mike-Would you provide us with your background in the industry when you post your information on embedded systems. And please be specific other than to say I worked for B-Tree. We want to be sure you have credibility when you present you research. Jan

To: Mike Winn who wrote (8029)	12/30/1997 11:25:00 AM
From: patrick gillis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 31646

Mike, In my opinion anyone who cares to intiate serious criticism without any true foundation to begin with is atogonistic, not to say that your knowledge is off-base, but one without merit. How could you possibly begin by promising to do DD later rather than now? Patrick

To: Mike Winn who wrote (8029)	12/30/1997 11:30:00 AM
From: M. Frank Greiffenstein	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 31646

Strawman Tactic... <<Anyhow, continue to flame me if you want>> Mike Winn For those of you you were never on a forensic debating team, Mr. Winn is using a "strawman" argument, meaning sets up a phony issue then proceeds to knock it down like a straw man. Nobody here has flamed Mr. Winn, just a few mild criticisms and simple obsrvations that Mr. Winn makes a habit of pooh-poohing small stocks. As CK Houston points out, it is emotionally important for Mr. Winn to get flamed, because it validates his views of himself, the board, and the stock. But there is an irony I wish to point out. Mr. Winn attacks TPRO with postings that imply the Allan Bradley and Rockwell have programs to whip the embedded chip problem, so TPRO has serious competition. What Mr. Winn doesn't know despite all his night owl hyperactivity is that TPRO has a seat on the Allan-Bradley board <g>. When TPRO is asked to "scrap" somebody's old factory machinery, guess which products TPRO introduces with a 10% mark-up? Allen-Bradley. DocStone

To: Mike Winn who wrote (8029)	12/30/1997 12:34:00 PM
From: JDN	Respond to of 31646

Dear Mike: But the truth will always win. Yes, Mike, I agree with your final statement. Actually, unlike the others, at least you post your E-mail address and not try and hide. So for that reason I have no problem with you posting anything you honestly believe. As to IBM and capacity, I think you must be referring to IS problems not imbedded systems. If you feel IBM can handle all the IS problems I suggest you consider buying PTUS which is at least one of the tools IBM Services uses under license agreement. JDN

To: Mike Winn who wrote (8029)	12/30/1997 1:52:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 31646

Mike, Of course that have to replace the Embedded systems. Do you think TPRO is going to reprogram them?? <vbg> However, companies are, for the most part, unaware of where and how embedded systems are utilized in their manufacturing floors. TPRO, as I understand it, will sell them the CD with its full Y2K assessment and remediation strategy as well as providing experienced and trained consultants to assist in-house personnel. Cheryl, Have I left anything out?? Btw, having to replace embedded chip systems provides another investment opportunity. Anyone have any good picks for companys that specialize in updating and replacing non-Y2K compliant systems?? Regards, Ron