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 : 3Com Corporation (COMS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Porter who wrote (24641)	11/17/1998 5:42:00 PM
From: James A. Shankland	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 45548

Having not used a "modern" COMS nic, I hardly feel you are in a position to tell me that they are not second rate... perhaps the COMS nics are that much better. Boy, I sure don't want to get into NIC wars here. My point was that the Intel NICs are excellent (outstanding reliability, can be driven full-duplex at a full 100 Mb/s without a high CPU load, etc.). I suspect the COMS ones are about comparable. There is an upper bound on how good a 10/100 Mb Ethernet NIC can be. Perhaps, since you have asserted that the Intel NICs are "second rate", you could tell us what you base that assertion on. In what specific ways are the Intel NICs inferior to the COMS ones? My point here is not to bash COMS products or tout Intel ones. I'm long COMS, and closed my long INTC position a little too early, at just over 90 (OK, quite a bit too early). But we should be investing wisely, based on facts and not wishful thinking. I don't believe that Intel's NICS are inferior to COMS's, based on my firsthand experience with the Intel NICs, and what I hear from others about both. I believe they are both excellent. If you have facts that indicate otherwise, please let us all know them. It would certainly be relevant.