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 : QUANTUM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hungry Investor who wrote (7344)	2/16/1998 4:18:00 PM
From: John Biddle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9124

. . . I'm sure that it has been thought of by the R&D departments of all the big drive makers, and I'm sure they all came up with the fact that the additional cost per drive isn't worth reducing the seek time by 1/3-1/2 or increasing the throughput. I don't disagree that the R&D folks at all of the major drive mfgs are LOTS smarter and more knowledgeable in this matter than I am. I was hoping to discover specifically why it didn't make sense. The disk drive is the slowest component of the system and although they have been getting MUCH bigger, they have been getting faster only slowly. Given that the rest of the PC is getting faster at a much higher rate, it seems like a place of significant opportunity. Money spent educating the consumer is a red herring. If the drive is significantly faster it won't matter why. Speed is something the consumer already understands. If the additional cost is only electronics, it shouldn't take long for that to become a nit.