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 (5955)	3/27/1999 7:16:00 PM
From: Stitch	Respond to of 9256

LT, <<So help me understand the difference in technology between a high-end desktop and a server drive. I see it not as capacity or even performance - its the interface - >> Well, performance is, in many ways, the interface. For sure Ultra ATA nips at the heels of SCSI, and just as inevitable SCSI climbs the performance curve. IMO server drives are shifting to the 10K RPM, 25 GB and up capacities, with SCSI and Fibre Channel interfaces. Desktop mid to high end performance is centered on Ultra ATA at 7200 RPM and up to 10-20 GB. <<So in my agrument about polarization, I see the high-end desktop as a low end server drive. i.e. really one segment from the technology standpoint (again except for the interface - right now anyway!)>> I guess you could always have some cross over but it is negligible when discussing market segments IMO. I do not know of any ATA servers. That is a major difference by itself. Best, Stitch

To: La Traguhs who wrote (5955)	3/28/1999 2:03:00 AM
From: Frodo Baxter	Respond to of 9256

>So help me understand the difference in technology between a high-end desktop and a server drive. I see it not as capacity or even performance - its the interface - and I submit that data indicates the EIDE Ultra66 to perform on par with SCSI, so that will start to blur. Geez, it's not I've been saying this for the past year or anything. :) The reason this is interesting is because this gives entry for the Maxtors and Quantums of the world to frontally attack Seagate. Slap on a SCSI interface into an 7200rpm IDE drive, up the cache RAM, rename it (this point is crucial! if you don't brand it correctly, it'll be considered "low-end server drive"), and sell it in line with your usual desktop margins. This is a whopping 1000 basis points less than Seagate's standard margins. How realistic is this scenario? Hmmm... You be the judge: quantum.com quantum.com (what's that dongle on the lower right of the Atlas?) For those of you who think Seagate will somehow be insulated because of Cheetah, you're smoking something weird. 1) The next generation Cheetah is ramping no faster than similar offerings from competitors. 2) Cheetah has 90% market share. This will go down. 3) Cheetah remains a small portion of Seagate's enterprise revenue. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons to own Seagate as a stock, but technological leadership, proprietary advantage, and time to market are not among them.

To: La Traguhs who wrote (5955)	3/28/1999 4:08:00 AM
From: Stitch	Respond to of 9256

LT, We are not the only ones sorting out the differences between SCSI and FC: biz.yahoo.com Best, Stitch

To: La Traguhs who wrote (5955)	3/28/1999 5:32:00 AM
From: Z Analyzer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9256

<<So in my argument about polarization, technologically, I see the high-end desktop as a low end server drive, i.e. really one segment from the technology standpoint (again except for the interface - right now anyway!) >> I think I understand finally! Either we have one or two platter cheapies or higher platter 7200 rpm drives. For digital set top boxes and VCRs, do we need higher performance than current which would argue for high platter 5200 rpm drives if this becomes a significant user of drives?