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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (68563)	11/14/1998 7:01:00 PM
From: Timothy Liu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

In terms of NGIO, it is interesting that Intel is willing to make this spec royalty free but the trio want royalty. My believe is if Intel gave NGIO away like PCI, it is going to fly. Synchronized protocol like PCI is limited by speed. Higher the frequency, the more difficult it is to implement. Time to go to a packet based protocol, be it NGIO or something else. My money is on NGIO. Tim JMHO of course and not Intel's

To: John Koligman who wrote (68563)	11/15/1998 1:29:00 AM
From: jim kelley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Dog, You keep saying how much money CPQ is making in the low end of the market. But when I look at their earning reports I do not see the earning. Gross margin is interesting but when you subtract the operational costs that CPQ is enduring there is little left on the bottom line. You are beginning to sound like a make over of HPEACE. There does not appear to be a I/O problem currently with desktops or servers. The big problem is ethernet and internet bandwidth. It is going to take sometime for the bandwidth problem to be resolved. By the time it is resolved you will see many more solutions to the I/O bandwidth which will then be an emerging issue. There are a lot of potential solutions to this problem. Packet busses, asynchronous buses, switch technology are a few of the technologies. I guess what you are really saying is that you expect CPQ to go with a proprietary high end I/O bus design. Well this should increase their engineering and development costs substantially and render their design incompatible with the third party options for their servers. Are you saying that CPQ intends to go with proprietary systems rather than open systems? Regards, Jim Kelley