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 : IFMX - Investment Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: paul who wrote (8863)	1/19/1998 10:07:00 PM
From: Lou	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14631

Cheers for the variety of posters at IFMX. Whether, your are tech or techless, or whether you can or can't post at IFMX. I sense you are welcome, and that many are investing in this stock. I only keep up with a few threads, but I will say this, the posters here, wherever they come from stay on topic, and make great posts. I(n) M(y) H(umble) O(pinion) Lou P.S. When I went long with IFMX, I wasn't sure that that a D(ata) B(ase) was any different than a S(erver) in a restaurant. But, you guys have taught me. Looking forward to being served with steaks in the Steak House when IFMX warms to Medium Rare. I havn't forgotten the e-mail to Mr. "F", but as soon as earnings are announced(-----a better time for our questions----), we can put it to him, but in a fair and reasonable manner.

To: paul who wrote (8863)	1/20/1998 9:52:00 AM
From: Mark Finger	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 14631

>>" Sun is the big loser" - Oh come on Mark, how can you put DEC, >>Sequent and Sun in the same sentance and say this. Of the three, Sun is the loser. The actual losses are more in terms of PR and mindshare, rather than revenue. However, PR and mindshare are very important. In particular, DEC needs the deal worse to be able to support the continued research on its OS. I characterized Sequent as a smaller vendor. But remember that smaller vendors add up. >>Due to the complex code sharing and joint developments these >>agreements entail i expect Sun to walk away from many low volume >>deals - Sequent ships around a 1,000 servers a year, 1/70 - 1/80 >>what Sun ships. Sun has a lot more at stake to improve Solaris in >>general rather than customize it so that every one of the less than >>100 servers Sequent ships a month goes out with Solaris. I suspect >>DEC is a little more strapped for business and has less to lose by >>fiddling around with some vendors. First, consider that Sun and Sequent are in different segments of the server market. The bulk of Sun's servers will be 4-CPU models which compete with NT servers rather than Sequent. Second, consider that Sequent has the NUMA architecture, which I thought that they were also trying to get accepted by certain other vendors. If this is true, the vendor who gets Sequent has the inside track on some additional sales. >>Alpha is an intel killer on paper but not in the real world. One of the reasons for this is that NT is still a 32-bit OS, which cripples the Alpha by limiting it only to the clock rate difference, rather than allowing it the full capability of its 64-bit capability. To demonstrate, consider that the fastest NT TPC/C benchmark is only now in the range that Unix Alpha was setting over two years ago. Look at what has happened to CPU performance in the years in between. Here is what I would consider the relative ratings of CPU's at this time (I may be somewhat off because I do not follow this too closely). I am assuming a range of applications, on fully optimized operating systems (read Unix, instead of crippled 32-bit NT) and good optimizing compilers--based on Intel Pentium II being 1.0: Alpha 1.6 MIPS 1.4 PowerPC 1.2 SPARC 1.0 Intel 1.0 Note that these are subject to change based on releases, but these seem to have generally been good for the last couple years IMO.