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 : Identix (IDNX) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jean who wrote (8750)	6/14/1998 8:24:00 PM
From: Buck	Respond to of 26039

Jean, In order for our equipment to work the way it is designed, fingerprints must be taken on our equipment, stored on our equipment and verified on our equipment. Remembering that we use a special Algorithm, any variation of the above could alter the results depending on the application. This is what was explained to me when I inquired about the testing. P.S., I notice the average volume has jumped to 104,000 from about 75,000 a few months ago.

To: jean who wrote (8750)	6/15/1998 10:31:00 AM
From: Hockeyfan	Respond to of 26039

Jean, I may be wrong about Identix being the only ones to sell their unit to the author, but I think most of the problem lies in the authors assumption that the TouchSafe II should operate as supplied. I believe that the Touchsafe is supposed to be calibrated to the sensitivity appropriate for the intended use. The TouchSafe II is intended for widespread use in a corporate environment where IDX technicians can assist in the installation and calibration of the system, not for one-off mail orders to individuals looking to safeguard their home PC. I believe the upcoming F3 product will be more appropriate for the use intended by the NCO author. It is odd that the installed base of Identix's Touchsafe II is probably larger than all other 5 scanners tested combined. Could this be IDX marketing talent? Probably not. The results of this test are simply incompatible with what we know reality to be. In any event, IDX should still be chastised for failing to ascertain the intended use of the author and offer assistance to make certain the the test results would be valid.