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 : EMC How high can it go? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (6195)	5/4/1999 11:48:00 AM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 17183

Hitachi is Japan's biggest electronics manufacturer and it does offer a wide variety of hard disc drives for sale . I assume that they make these drives themselves. IBM is also a large maker of disk drives. An outsider will never know the details of the EMC - IBM deal , or the HP -Hitachi one so anything I say would just be a guess. Like you I assume there will be some sharing of information, and that EMC will buy lots of IBM drives and that IBM in turn will help EMC sell finished storage solutions, and that maybe EMC will suggest use of IBM computers when they can. Although IBM doesn't always execute well, it's storehouse of tech ability is very high, so maybe they can help EMC integrate the computer and the storage solution better via software. I understand that a big push is to find a way to make customers old tape drives retain usefulness. The best way to do this is software that can allocate data to either a new EMC device or an old tape drive, depending on how often it will be used. Tapes are slow, and tend to break but they are already paid for and are good for archive storage of seldom used data. Customers would buy EMC products for data that is called up often, so therefore EMC solutions could be integrated as needed. All of this doesn't leave a lot of room for HP. Maybe there's no connection between the deals at all, but I'm always suspicious of coincidences. As you can see from the above I don't have all of this figured out. Also see post 6198.