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 (6888)	1/15/1998 6:06:00 PM
From: uu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 64865

Twister: > This is a reporter LIFTING his stuff off of the Sunw press release. Oh... Ok I did not realize ot was from Reuters. But where on SUNW's earnings report it says what this reporter is saying?! This reporter simply has taken things out of context from the original earnings report and put them together in a "rush" (that he even forgot to say what date it is today)! Anyway, it does not matter! This reporter (or for that matter the whole world) can go on and put whatever spin they want, I, as a share holder, am extremly pleased with Sun's latest report and even more pleased with its next 4-8 quarters outlook! Regards, Addi Jamshidi

To: cfimx who wrote (6888)	1/15/1998 9:34:00 PM
From: Pierre	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 64865

Whoa, Addi. ...This is not an analyst. This is a reporter LIFTING his stuff off of the Sunw press release. That is all it is. There is nothing sinister about this at all. Sorry, I'm not buying. I may be technology challenged, but my bullshit detector is in perfect working order. The full article is attached. Five paragraphs of "income shortfall," and "increased spending." Only when one arrives at the sixth (last) paragraph is it mentioned SUNW beat estimates. And this from Reuters! An example by inverse analogy: article re: Hindenberg disaster - first five paragraphs devoted to lovely trans-atlantic trip. A sixth (and last) paragraph mentioning dirigible exploded, burned - dozens die. Accurate, slanted, spun - and bullshit. nt.excite.com Pierre

To: cfimx who wrote (6888)	1/15/1998 11:51:00 PM
From: Kashish King	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 64865

I don't think Darwin needs to take any lessons in failure from Microsoft's BOB, do you? If you think BOB was bad, just wait for the final chapter on Microsoft's failed distributed component architecture DCOM. Anymore jokes Microsoft? The clowns at Microsoft simply went along for the ride as the electronics industry, led by Intel, made PCs the most affordable and flexible business appliance you could imagine. Microsoft just went along for the ride until eventually they had the majority of software vendors, and by extension consumers, trapped within their proprietary tangle of muck and mire. What's particularly bothersome is that they fail to recognize the fact that any time they have stepped outside of the desktop applications domain it has resulted in abject failure. DCOM is the latest fiasco and just think, they have been working on that pile of dog dirt for a decade. Give me billions of dollars from some cheezy OS which I control and I will guarantee you that I will deliver the most popular applications, too. infoworld.com