SI
SI
discoversearch

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 StocksAll About Sun Microsystems


Previous 10 Next 10 
To: alydar who wrote (64811)4/11/2009 12:44:55 PM
From: Arthur Tang
   of 64865
 
You mean I used less technical jargon?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Manly Dirk who wrote (64808)4/11/2009 8:38:48 PM
From: Don Green
1 Recommendation   of 64865
 
Athur is name dropper Supreme...

He once knew everyone...

a.k.a. Silicon Investor's Forrest Gump....

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Manly Dirk who wrote (64808)4/11/2009 8:39:24 PM
From: Don Green
2 Recommendations   of 64865
 
Arthur is name dropper"Supreme"...

He once knew everyone...

a.k.a. Silicon Investor's Forrest Gump....

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Don Green who wrote (64815)4/12/2009 5:39:54 AM
From: Arthur Tang
   of 64865
 
Mr. Green; it is not name dropping or history. It is a reference, that you can check with Craig Barrett, Andy Grove, etc. for their knowledge of Arthur Tang.

I found straight technical jargons left people wanting, So, some history of technology makes more interesting reading.

But technology moved on, industries changed, and investment wizards need to find new technology that will make money for them?

So the little tips, will find the iceberg?

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Arthur Tang who wrote (64813)4/12/2009 4:00:41 PM
From: alydar
   of 64865
 
No, I think your english better. I used to have a difficult time understanding what the heck you were talking about. Now, forwhatever reason, your sentences makes sense to me. Now, you would not mind, tell us who is going to be the next Intel or who Intel will buy to maintain there monopoly.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: alydar who wrote (64817)4/13/2009 4:00:16 AM
From: Arthur Tang
   of 64865
 
Intel is really off subject on Java thread. The future however, is all semi processing technology. The circuits are defined by Cadence software to tape out.

What hardware business is going forward, depends largely on multichannel transmission such as edgeQam. ARRS is setting some standards. Cisco is trying to do the same with ethernet blades on edgeQam.

So, computer chipset for motherboards will need edgeQam channels build in; giving up PCI, ISA, DDR, AGP, and other slow buses. Then ethernet will be taken over by USBIF bus which is an extension of hypertransport pipeline directly to cpu L2 cache.

This means computers should be build by telephone company rather than by cpu(abacus) manufacturers. Chipset is king, tuned to different channels for data distribution. Cpus are merely ascii code handlers(8 bit data). Data centers will have to use tiny motherboards(low core voltage) connected by USBIF bus.

Now, we are back to bad english? Just all technical words, maybe meaningful to some computer science majors. If you are astute investor, just google keywords and you will find all the explanations? Keywords made technical jargons google happy?

A final note on IBM's interest of Java. Its Java ISP servers for many dialup modems on the net(cloud computing data transmission plus Microsoft dotnet strategy on ISP servers).

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Arthur Tang who wrote (64818)4/13/2009 6:11:02 AM
From: QwikSand
   of 64865
 
Arthur, I googled USBIF and all I found was a bunch of posts like this one:

We searched our database and could not find a definition other than Universal Serial Bus Implementers Forum for USBIF.

So USBIF is simply a group where hardware people working on USB implementation projects exchange information. If these people are currently standardizing some kind of new fast bus that is beyond Infiniband et. al and similar to Hypertransport or Quickconnect (Intel's new memory bus), could you kindly supply a pointer or link to a white paper or specification document which describes this bus you are predicting, or at least names it?

If you are unable to do so, then, bad English or not, I conclude that for the umpteenth time you have simply strung together buzz words whose meanings you do not even understand to produce random and useless gibberish.

If you're just talking about USB 3.0, which is a next-generation enhancement to USB and of course mostly designed by Intel, who first demonstrated it, then your message is equally meaningless. USB 3.0 is a very fast peripheral bus to handle fast streaming of high-volume data. It is not foreseen as revolutionizing or replacing CPU architecture in any way. If you feel there is documentation to the contrary, please provide a link to a document, not another stream of impenetrable gibberish.

--QS

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: QwikSand who wrote (64819)4/13/2009 9:32:52 AM
From: Arthur Tang
   of 64865
 
USB3.0, USBIF are not yet released standards. USBIF is not related to the forum. Google may not yet be able to get the USBIF specifications, because they have not any website with the standards published.

Having said that USBIF is a USB standard that has a 1 ghz carrier frequency with multiple intermediate frequencies to distinguish different data channels.

Sometimes, we are ahead of ourselves when Google is behind in submitted websites. On the other hand, you might have to wait until edgeQam people publish USBIF standards. edgeQam and USBIF differ in that one has many subcarrier frequencies for data channels, whereas USBIF can be used thru satellite transmission with many IF frequency channels on one 1 ghz carrier.

Now you know how advanced we are, talking about technology. This USBIF technology is a necessary change to use edgeQam type(ofdm) of data transmission on carrier satellites(long distance telephone) already in the sky.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: Arthur Tang who wrote (64820)4/13/2009 1:26:58 PM
From: QwikSand
   of 64865
 
A USB 3.0 standards document was released in November 2008. The 500-page document in PDF form together with its subsequent additions and corrections, is publicly available at this URL:

usb.org

Once again, this quasi-language:

USB3.0, USBIF are not yet released standards. USBIF is not related to the forum. Google may not yet be able to get the USBIF specifications, because they have not any website with the standards published.

is devoid of meaning. You needn't bother to explain. I'm sure anyone reading this forum is amused (or feels pity) at the pretension that something exists on planet Earth of technical interest that Google is not yet able to get, but that Arthur Tang is able to get, or which Arthur Tang knows and understands better than Google does.

--QS

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: QwikSand who wrote (64821)4/13/2009 2:04:22 PM
From: Arthur Tang
   of 64865
 
Unfortunately, USBIF has multichannel capability, so that USB3.0 may not be widely implemented on Nov. release document.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10