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 : Ampex Corporation (AEXCA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mrvn t. martian who wrote (3777)	11/9/1998 8:28:00 PM
From: Hal Campbell	Respond to of 17679

<<simple solution, change the name to ampex.com>> Cards? You still around? What are ya, a .COM munist? ;- ) But you are right ......and as Ed implied ..... if they get the price and cash flow up a bit so they can acquire - something along those lines might work. We might under certain circumstances have a sort of hybrid Internet stock on our hands. Can always use a new dream with AXC.

To: mrvn t. martian who wrote (3777)	11/11/1998 6:36:00 PM
From: Hal Campbell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Cards. Do you have any idea what is going on in this trading range? Who's buying...who's selling ( the sellers I understand- particularly this time of year )? Anybody trading shares back and forth to simulate volume? Though the dollar amounts involved are very modest, I am wondering who is providing support at 1. More than that - given the particulars of AXC right now, I am wondering why they are providing support. Maybe its just the web host possibility.

To: mrvn t. martian who wrote (3777)	11/16/1998 6:06:00 PM
From: Richard Esmond	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17679

Hello all, I have just been asked to do som research on Ampex, so I have been reading the last 50 posts. You boy be some dedicated posters, I'll tell ya! Anyway, I am the CTO of a software company that historicaly offers client side development tools in the imaging space. More reciently we introduced a near-line storage managment package for the imaging and document managment markets, but that is still quite new. We are now expanding that software product into video and internet. Hence my research, for which I thank you for your highly interesting input. My point: If the tape vendors wish to play in the DoD space one issue that has not yet been addressed is the DoD 5015.2 RMA standard. This standard deals with the disposition of documents when their time on this world is over. The specification defines specifically how these documents must be destroyed, and this includes most specifically digital documents. And not just the main copy, all copies. If for example; you have n backups of a document you must certify that all copies are irrevokably(spelling?) gone. That they can not be undeleted, restored from backup or recreated via some exotic magnitologicalfieldomizer or whatever. Else, organizations could just 'soft' delete documents broadly and 'recover' those documents later that were of benefit to them, but 'have unfortunatly destroyed' documents that were damaging. On magnetic disk drives, the data is overwritten 20 times. On optical, it is burned through by the write laser. Write Once Read Many... Destroy Once as well. (g) I spent some effort to get StorageTech to work towards a technical solution at the drive level, but they could not get Quantum to care much about the issue. This caused me to lose some interest in using their product in a project for archiving e-mail from the year 2000 DoD e-mail system. Just thought I would share, and get your opinion. Richard Ps. I know the spelling/typing sucks, but show pity for the uneducated!