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 : Dell Technologies Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (44588)	5/23/1998 5:04:00 PM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 176387

There are discrete technology quanta but they do not appear discretely in the marketplace. There are still more than 10 million DOS systems which do not use Windows - those guys are about 10 years behind the curve. These are predominantly dedicated applications, not general purpose ones. But there are also nearly as many windows 3.1 and 3.11 users as there are Win95 users. The 386 was introduced in 1986, yet 16 bit applications using the 286 segmented model STILL exist in many applications and were a direct part of the OS until Win95. What happens is that the inertia of the installed base filters out the economic effect of the technical change, basically integrates it over the lifetime of the relevant technology. Software has a much longer lifetime than hardware, but even with hardware the period of integration is more like 4-5 years, driven by factors like the decay of book value of the capital asset. This is why 486 machines are still living useful lives in the big shops. I am not arguing Meat's basic point around total cost of ownership, which is valid. I am disagreeing with the conclusion that somehow this will be a justification for rapid uptake of new technology. It never has been in the past. Technologists like Meat (and me) tend to see the most advanced technology users as representative of the state of the busines but the market data says different.

To: Chuzzlewit who wrote (44588)	5/23/1998 6:05:00 PM
From: Jim Patterson	Respond to of 176387

Chuzzlewit, RE: You said that the technology curve is continuous, by which I take to mean that it progresses by minute amounts. But it seems to me that that is not the case. For example, isn't it safe to say that the migration from DOS based software to Windows based software is a quantum leap? I think what Rudog is getting at here is that corporations don't upgrade all at one time. They don't go from 100% DOS WP to 100% windows and officeXX. By constant, Corporations are always upgrading parts of their IT infrastructure. Over time, there is constant improvement in the entire system. One thing he also points out, He mentions a company with 80,000 PC's and a 4 year buying cycle of 20,000 PC's. I have heard of this type of replacement stratagy several times. This is not good for the PC industry's growth rate. As companies Fix on a number of the total PC's they will replace in one year. Jim