Talk:Mostek

message: Late breaking news.  "Mostek Dies Another Death". The remainder of the original Mostek HQ site will be closed, it was  announced today.  This affects the jobs of approx 1000 employees at the Carrollton, TX site, many of whom are long-term employees who have survived several previous stages of the Life & Death of MOSTEK.
The article originally read: (United technologies) sold it again to SGS-ATES in 1981.
However the MostekLives site states that it was purchased not by SGS, but Thomson, and in 1985, not 1981. Anyone have more sources we can compare?
Maury 14:07, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: At the time, or perhaps shortly thereafter, it was SGS-Thompson, which is now STMicro.  I'm not sure about the date.  --Brouhaha 18:27, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thompson first bought Mostek from UTC in October, 1985. Mostek had indicated that it was going to close down and run out the fab line. A few days after that Mostek and Thompson came to an agreement and the company was sold.  Thompson and SGS formed SGS-Thompson after that time. That company is now STMicroelectronics. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Colonyrice (talk • contribs) .
UTC actually closed the operation totally — firing everybody. Thomson bought it a few days later but called back only ~~1000(?). JdelaF (talk) 03:49, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled

message: Does origin of Mostek name (Metal Oxide Semiconductor) need explanation? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.159.157.84 (talk • contribs) .
:I think so. Please be bold and add an explanation!
:Atlant 17:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "The decline in the face of Japanese competition" IS NOT a PERSONAL ATTACK on someone.  The fact is the Japanese companies were yielding 90-95% on the 4564 DRAMS.  This meant they could undercut the prices to cheaper than American companies at 20-30% yield.  It is called predatory pricing...Soon afterwards the American companies had to go to high yield manufacturing to survive.  At one time only one American company, Micron Technologies made DRAM memories.  There were trade sanctions which did come about.  Harley-Davidson got trade sanctions on Honda and Yamaha bikes.  John Deere recently got sanctions against Kubota and other Japanese tractors.. 172.10.47.126 (talk) 03:40, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology of the name 

message: I think the term Japan Inc is obsolete, incorrectly suggesting that these companies were working together, and not neutral. The term is better suited for Anti-Japanese sentiment.  Andries (talk) 23:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Japanese Inc

message: I assume it's Worcester, but do not have the resources to verify. 208.232.182.67 (talk) 16:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worchester? 

message: "United Technologies blew their investment. They put someone in charge who had zero semiconductor experience (knowing how to build jet engines isn't the same!) and had no comprehension of either the up-front investment required or the long time for ROI.[2] They also sacrificed their leadership position in some markets and put all of their eggs in the DRAM basket. They eventually spent hundreds of millions trying to keep the company going during the various semiconductor and videogame crashes of the early 1980s, and eventually gave up and sold it to Thomson Semiconductor in 1985 for a mere $71 million."
This entire section is much different than the professional tone of the rest of the article. It reads as if the author has a personal vendetta against Mostek. "blew their investment" "knowing how to build jet engines isn't the same!" just to name a few poor word choices.
The vendetta seems to be more against United Technologies' mismanagement of Mostek, mostly for focusing on DRAM - not staying diversified.  192.206.243.220 (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Decline in the face of Asian competition 

message: I've added a citation needed tag for this part: "Zilog had modified the recipe for Z80 chips to keep the yields low".
I find it highly dubious because such a change would affect also Zilog's selling prices / revenue.148.64.26.100 (talk) 16:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Well - it could very well be like that. But still, if the yield is low, also the number of good parts that can be bought is low so Zilog could not meet the demand. However, I've seen that the article was revised in the mean time and that bit about the low yield was taken out.89.37.121.170 (talk) 07:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low yield Z80s