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 : Disk Drive Sector Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stitch who wrote (4751)	10/17/1998 12:31:00 AM
From: La Traguhs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

Hi Stitch, You "outloud" comments are surely thought provoking. So I got provoked and came up with my thoughts. I think Seagate has to swim with the areal density flow or sink. It appears that the entry capacity point on the sub $100 OEM drive has moved from 2.1 GB to 4 GB. With the areal density march going forward (still irregardless of the what the market really needs), the box builders can now get 4 GB in one platter/two heads versus six months ago where we were talking 2.1 GB for one/platter two heads at about the same price point. Naturally, they'll push for the 4 GB capacity. Ya gotta remember that the playing field is starting to become leveled. We're at one platter/two heads for the low end market - not far from the asymptote of one platter/one head. (This, my sources say, for 3-4 GB capacity will occur mid to end next year). My guess is, when that happens, the guy with most efficient vertical model wins and that could be Seagate - if they stay in the race. Yah know, I know they're pushing to stay in the time-to-market desktop race, but their poor execution towards that objective speaks to a lack of stomach for the segment. Regards, LT

To: Stitch who wrote (4751)	10/18/1998 7:16:00 AM
From: Z Analyzer	Respond to of 9256

<<I always thought it was axiomatic that in the DD biz you lived and died by first-to-market. But axioms have a way of dying as new paradigms move in. I wonder out loud if it is at all possible that Seagate, whose bulk heads/media production is still only fruitful at the lower range, has determined that there is no need to be at the leading edge of areal density for the desktop? Has the leading edge become the bleeding edge? I am hearing horrendous storys of bad yields at the high end (on media and heads). I am also aware, as we all are, of the significant shift to lower price PC and subsequent pressure on DD prices. >> QNTM indicated to me about 6 months ago that their customers were more interested in quality than maximum densities. But of course that could well be rationalization for falling behind the density curve. Can you tell us which manufacturers are have the bleeding edge problems? Z