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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cfimx who wrote (6574)	1/8/1998 11:31:00 AM
From: Mike J	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Off Topic Opportunity..... I thought I'd share my fellow SUNW investors with this info.. Check out the SI link exchange2000.com It talks about some companies that were dumped by MM Monroe Parker. It is very 'speculative' info, but I thought Doug Eickerman's info was particularly interesting since one of the stocks, VLCC, is up 60% today. As a personal note, I should let you know that I bought a small share in FLEM, since it was one of the two that Doug thought would advance the quickest. Good luck to any other risk takers! Mike - mpjohnson@tasc.com

To: cfimx who wrote (6574)	1/8/1998 3:47:00 PM
From: Alok Sinha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

I will take a shot at responding to one of the ISSUES as you put it. Granted, DEC and HP offer customers a choice (so does IBM). However, it is unclear if their PC business adds a lot of shareholder value (for DEC it certainly dosen't; HP due to its position in printers,may be). Volume for the sake of volume is not necessarily good. In today's age towards inter-operability, choice does not have to come from the same vendor (esp. if offering that does not add value). SUNW will offer choice (through Darwin) to high end corporate users, but ensure that it adds to the bottom line. I also agree that 64 bit UNIX from DEC and HP will be more competitive in 1998, but SUNW is well positioned to compete (which is why McNealy and Co. are paid big bucks). The big advantage that SUNW has is in its vison with respect to network computing (which IBM is also subscribing to; I read in recent recent article in NetObjects that IBM has more than 2000 progammers working on improving Java which is more than SUN ) and the "Write once run everywhere" objective. This is already contributing to high end Server growth. In large corporations (and I work for one), there is increasing disillusionment with the continuous fat client software upgrade cycle, esp. because in terms of functionality not much value is being added. NT was a big step for MS, but for the nature of applications it is used for small and medium duty office functions (e-mail, spreadsheets , wordprocessing , web browsing, file exchanges) the current version suffices. Nobody in their right mind considers NT to be the platform for mission critical operations in banking, trading and finance, although a lot of front end systems are designed to run on NT due to ease of use and familiarity of end users. The next round of upgrade cycles in WP and Spreadsheet software will confirm that with repect to these products we are approaching saturation. I wouldn't short Microsoft because I think Gates is already investing in high growth industries and the Company will do fine - I just don't think software and operating system sales (in the current form) will provide the level of growth needed to maintain MS's current lofty multiples. Incidentally, I find it ironic that you are willing to concede that SUNW performed well in 1997 (for whatever reasons). Considering that you have been consistently bearish during the period (1997 and before) that SUNW was doing well by your own admission (due to success of Starfire, which contributes a measly 200 MM of 10B in total sales), what makes you so sure that your current projection for doom and gloom will come true. You have certainly rationalized the reasons for SUNW's demise (DEC and HP) but how are these arguments different with respect to future outcome than those before. I don't think any portion of my post would be objectively considered "shooting down the messenger", or would it? Regards Alok

To: cfimx who wrote (6574)	1/8/1998 11:48:00 PM
From: Beachbumm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

<<You laugh at DEC but that is a mistake.>> So now it is to be DEC and HWP that will prove SUNW's undoing. I agree with you about one thing -- DEC is no laughing matter. I just refreshed my memory with a five-year chart and noted that today you can buy a share of DEC for almost exactly what it fetched in January of '93 -- about 38 bucks. No wonder the bond market is doing so well. There is definitely no inflation as measured by DEC share price. But in 1998 the incredible managers of this company will awaken and find out that there is something else they can do besides collecting money market interest on a legacy of cash. How exciting. As for HWP, well, at least they seem to be doing a few things over there. I don't particularly care for sixties-style conglomerates, which HWP reminds me of. There are a few too many legs on this octopus which mean endless possibilities of diversion and straying from focus. They should probably just throw in the towel on PCs. And I suspect that shiploads of cheaper Asian products could prove annoying to some divisions. But I will, at your behest, keep my eyes peeled on HWP. Nevertheless, I do believe, now that the honeymoon is over, that we will, as investors, enjoy a more fulfilling conjugal relationship with SUNW than we could attain with either DEC or HWP. Beachbumm

To: cfimx who wrote (6574)	1/9/1998 1:18:00 AM
From: paul	Respond to of 64865

Twister you spend all your time knocking SUN and Unix and after all this you bring up DEC?? Here's a "service" company which has been desperate for Revenues for the past 10 years and floundering badly. Why do you think Sequent (another winner) would strike a deal with DEC - perhaps DEC is bending over backward with its unix code and promised significant jiggering of it a leading vendor such as Sun would not after all Solaris has a future and digital Unix does not. When i had a AMC Hornet i hand painted it cause i didnt give a **** what happened to it. Thats the digital deal in a nutshell - what does DEC have to lose. no one questions DEC's enginnering prowess but it hasnt turned into $$. They have a lead over everyone in 64 bit architecture and clustering but this has been true for 3 years. "So all of you can shoot me"..hmmm like they say in the movies..i wouldnt waste the bullet.