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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Patriot Scientific - PTSC -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Benedict Arnold who wrote (4107)	12/30/1997 6:24:00 PM
From: Frederic Herman	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 8581

While I haven't done as thorough a technical analysis as Mr. Tara seems to have done regardiing Java chip technology, most of my recent engineering work is centered around Java technology, and I have a very strong background in microprocessor technology in general. Nothing that I have seen in Mr. Tara's post has ever been inaccurate to my knowledge, which is more than I can say about a lot of the posts from others on this thread. IMHO, Mr. Tara has gone out of his way to be specific and accurate about the information and analysis he has provided. The small amount of sarcasm that has been worked into some of his posts has always struck me as approriate, and restrained. I'm only writing this because of what I feel is an undeserved attack on Mr. Tara for speaking the reality of this stock and the claims about the processor product. My interest in PTSC has been because of the antenna technology which I see as having some real potential. I briefly owned the stock and sold it at 1.90, and might buy it again if it dips to .25. The Java chip stuff never seemed realistic to me from the time that Cap'n Bob crossposted to the SUNW and got my attention. Flame away.

To: Benedict Arnold who wrote (4107)	12/30/1997 6:31:00 PM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 8581

What facts that I have stated are inaccurate? That the PSC1000 was designed as a Forth processor? Do you deny that? If there are some other facts that you dispute, why don't you specify which ones, so that I can respond, rather than painting with a broad brush? I have always addressed issues specifically and point by point. All of the information that I have presented comes directly from the PTSC web site, from links that are pointed-to by the PTSC web site, or from personal communication with employees of PTSC or other companies involved in the development and marketing of the chip.