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 : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sector Investor who wrote (11197)	11/6/1998 9:48:00 AM
From: signist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42804

Hi Sector, What happens if or is it a matter of when an eight hundred pound gorilla buys this technology? John, Always The Worry wart However, IMHO, there will be plenty of business left for MRVC, regardless the outcome of these claims. Just a thought...Maybe MRVC doesn't concern themselves with patents because they may realize technology changes so rapidly that a lot of technology today will have short term lives and they just want to make as much as they can ...while they can on a product and then move on to better technology??? Over on the Yahoo thread, they have some good information from a variety of comments from the big boys re: this subject.

To: Sector Investor who wrote (11197)	11/7/1998 1:35:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 42804

Sector, Terence, and All, This information surrounding SilkRoad is interesting, and is causing a lot of speculation both market-wise and technologically. See other comments on the Ciena and Gilder threads and elsewhere during the past three days. I wouldn't be too taken about the single fiber strand aspect, however, because most responsible telecomm managers always want a back door to protect against route and element failures (ol' man back-hoe). Most architectures that permit restorative capabilities through seamless self-healing techniques usually are based on at least two diverse and redundant physical layer paths. This should not suggest that redundant paths couldn't be deployed when using the Fiber Driver, or with the proposed SR product fot that matter, since two of anything, in the end, can be procured if there are enough port and address accommodations. It may suggest, however, that if two physical paths are indeed needed to satisfy these diligence-related measures (and they usually are by the largest of customers, when there are very-high capacity links at stake), then this would only serve to negate the single fiber advantage, while possibly adding to the cost of terminal gear and administration. Just my observations as to the relative merits of a single strand approach, per se, for whatever it's worth. Regards, Frank Coluccio