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: La Traguhs who wrote (5928)	3/26/1999 5:37:00 PM
From: Yogi - Paul	Respond to of 9256

LT, <<I agree that Internet bandwidth will change the dynamic but I'm a bit worried there because as that happens some are saying our need or use of storage will actually shift to the Internet.>> Actually, that has been my position for quite some time. Recently, I've altered that a bit. I tend to believe that a great deal of multimedia content will eventually be downloaded from the internet. Music, short and eventually full length features, news content. I've always assumed that this content would not stay resident long term on the local drive and still believe this to be true. I do believe, however, that the content will stay resident for a very short term (1 day to 1 week) and that this will require capacities of 40-50 gigabytes on the local drive. This demand driver is solely based on the "always on" nature of DSL or cable delivery of the internet. Home networks being connected 24/7 to the internet at high speed is a powerful thing. Yogi

To: La Traguhs who wrote (5928)	3/26/1999 7:32:00 PM
From: Frodo Baxter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

I vigorously disagree with everything you said. >IMHO, the market segments for disk drives are being polarized between what will be the low end HDD's and the high capacity, high performance server drives with a "no-mans land" in between. If a company plays in the no-mans land they will lose. So all the Compaqs and HPs and Dells that are the bread and butter of the corporate world will disappear? Puleaze. >Now focus on either extreme; the low cost segment or the high-end segment and stop diddling in between, and you will win. You can't de-populate a high end drive to serve the low cost marketplace (and all except Seagate and soon Conner are doing that) and you can't goose up a low cost drive to meet the high end. At least I don't think you can. That's silly. I find it totally incredulous that you think that Conner has some huge cost savings embedded in a late-to-market, no-volume, vaporware 2-plate 4.3 design compared to the time-to-market, mega-volume 3-plate designs of Quantum and WDC. As for goosing up low cost drives to meet high end. Hah! You must have been MIA the past couple years, as Seagate continually whines about how they got their lunch eaten by competition from the low-end-of-the-high-end drives. The dirty little secret is that SCSI drives have much higher and undeserved margins than IDE drives, even when accounting for their higher performance and longer warranties. That's how Seagate got so fat and rich to begin with! SCSI will be a bloodbath this summer when all the majors will have their products out in volume, and gunning for Seagate. >The companies that recognize this and decide which one they will focus on, will be where I invest. Right now, that's Seagate. In the case of Seagate they have the horsepower to play well in both ends as they shut off the no-mans land stuff. >Right now, Seagate can't ship enough of their single platter, 4.3 GB U4 disk drives to meet demand. Right now, Seagate's Cheetah and Barracuda drives are picking up the slack in the drop in demand for their "no-mans land" disk drives. (which, BTW, I'll define as a greater than 2 platter platform designed for the desktop). So they are starting to find their "groove". Seagate can't ship enough of their U4 because they can't ramp 4.3 aggressively. Ditto 18LP high-ends. Call it no-man's land if you like. Doesn't change the fact that by far, the greatest revenue derives from mainstream desktop drives. And Seagate can't play. At least now they're wise enough to cut back production rather than dump it into the channel like they did in 97. All you need to do is look at areal density. At any given rotation speed, the higher areal density wins in the only two respects that users and OEMs care about, cost and performance. So let's review Quantum versus Seagate, circa May 1999: IDE: Cheapie: Seagate U4 4.3, ramping vs. Quantum CR 4.3, mature, in volume for a quarter Mainstream: Seagate 4.3, ramping vs. Quantum CX 6.8, ramping Performance: Seagate has seemingly exited vs. Quantum Plus KA 7200rpm 4.5, ramping SCSI: Low-end 7200rpm: Seagate Cuda 18LP 3.6, ramping vs. Quantum Atlas IV 4.5, ramping High-end 10,000rpm: Seagate Cheetah 3.0, ramping vs. Quantum Atlas 10K 3.0, ramping We are, after all, talking about technology companies. And you know how it is in tech. You're either the leader or you're fishbait.

To: La Traguhs who wrote (5928)	3/27/1999 6:50:00 AM
From: Z Analyzer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

<<MHO, the market segments for disk drives are being polarized between what will be the low end HDD's and the high capacity, high performance server drives with a "no-mans land" in between. If a company plays in the no-mans land they will lose.>> I hav eto agree with Lawrence here. Even before cable modems, the power desktop users will stillbe around. Dell customers and Pentium II buyers won't become single platter U-2 wimps all of a sudden. -Z