OCZ stock 30% up after Vector 150 series SSD announcement

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: OCZ stock 30% up after Vector 150 series SSD announcement[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2013/11/myce-ocz-stock-30-percent-up-95x75.gif[/newsimage]

Today OCZ shares saw a 30% increase in value slightly after the company announced the Vector 150 SSD and the embargo on reviews was lifted

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/ocz-stock-30-up-after-vector-150-series-ssd-announcement-69456/](http://www.myce.com/news/ocz-stock-30-up-after-vector-150-series-ssd-announcement-69456/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

If OCZ don´t get cheaper (in price,not quality) it won´t help much.

You can get much cheaper SSDs which aren´t slow (or youonly care about benchmarks), and these companies exist in the next years; whether OCZ exist isn´t sure


#3

[QUOTE=Wischmop;2708145]If OCZ don´t get cheaper (in price,not quality) it won´t help much.

You can get much cheaper SSDs which aren´t slow (or youonly care about benchmarks), and these companies exist in the next years; whether OCZ exist isn´t sure[/QUOTE]

Its the old story of quality over quantity, I believe that OCZ makes the best Consumer grade controller in the business today, I am not saying that others are not good, just not as good, when I want an SSD I want the best. I own Vectors and Vertex SSDs that I wouldn’t trade for anything.:wink: JMHO


#4

[QUOTE=alan1476;2708147]Its the old story of quality over quantity, I believe that OCZ makes the best Consumer grade controller in the business today, I am not saying that others are not good, just not as good, when I want an SSD I want the best. I own Vectors and Vertex SSDs that I wouldn’t trade for anything.:wink: JMHO[/QUOTE]

But the controller’s made by Indilinx and Indilinx is/was basically one of the many South Korean SSD start-ups, most of whom were very much related to Samsung (“part of Samsung” is far more accurate phrase, inferior to Samsung itself), which in its turn pioneered the SSD market of today though it was Toshiba that first developed NAND and many other companies made SSDs based on various types of RAM and NAND.

I don’t think OCZ quality is as good as that of Intel or Toshiba. From what I have gathered so far, the only thing OCZ has done better than any other company is marketing through various review sites, especially published in the English language, and especially those based in the US.

And it’s also very important to understand why OCZ’s market share is especially higher in the US market, than in any other major market by country. A very significant percent of OCZ’s entire quarterly revenues comes from SSD sales to retail consumers - individual end users that read those reviews very often and are heavily influenced by them - in the US. By comparison, most of Samsung’s and most of Toshiba’s SSD sales come from OEM markets. Though that still does not mean OCZ sells more SSDs to retail than Samsung or Intel. For most people outside the US, and most people live outside the US, OCZ prices are too high and it does not provide quality customer service in most markets. For example, Japanese electronics companies have never been able to penetrate South Korean market at least since I was first become interested in assembling my own PC, but even Toshiba Korea has much better service than OCZ in South Korea.

Nobody seems to present any explanation why OCZ failed. And why nobody prevented the very leader from mismanaging and leaving his company. I could see his name mentioned more often than the name of Samsung’s Lee Gunhee or Toshiba’s CEO/chairman on the sites SSDs are reviewed. And now the same sites are now blaming everything on him and on the very companies - like Intel - that helped OCZ to receive steady and profitable supply of the best NAND chips.

If quality is important and price is not, why are US consumers demanding such low prices from OCZ? By demanding lower prices, the consumers have been killing the company they have supported on the forum threads of all these review sites. I saw the same things happening with AMD, and Netscape, and Linux, and Wikipedia, and so on.


#5

Well, I don´t said that OCZs actual SSDs are awful, but in the past OCZ acting bad. I think it was the Vertex 2 that get after good reviews the worst NAND you could get on the market. The Petrol-series had at one online-shop 40% failed SSDs, mabe because cheap NAND and the Indilinx-controllers. I read in the past that a SSD was written on some sections 20000x, on other sections 40x (wear leveling, where are you?)

My favorite online-shop kicked OCZ completely away because of quality probs.

The actual line-up looks better, but still the OCZ-SSDs die more than most other ones.

It´s maybe a fast SSD (most consumers wouldn´t notice the different to a 90€ cheaper Sandisk Ultra Plus), but is it worth it? I dunno

http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?act=url&depth=2&hl=de&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=fr&tl=en&u=http://www.hardware.fr/articles/911-7/ssd.html&usg=ALkJrhhOLaGCb_J6pE_94z0R04Hs7PsNZg

I know those stastitics don´t show 100% of the real situation (especially you don´t know how many ppl use the direct-service from the brands), but it is a rough approximation to the truth

I would OCZ give a try, but their prices are much to high IMHO

http://geizhals.at/de/?cat=hdssd&xf=252_240#xf_top


#6

Too bad…