Kash,
Speaking of truly amazing statements:
If RDRAM offers no end-user performance improvement over PC 133 it is as dead as the DODO bird.
Realistically it needs to offer a 10% improvement to justify the price's being proposed. Otherwise consumers will simply buy the next faster CPU grade.
You must work on the technical side of the business -- anyone who looks at the business side knows that technical specs do not dictate product success. Do you own a Beta VCR? It's technically a much better product than VHS, but it lost for business reasons (alternatively, VHS won for business reasons in spite of the fact that it was not the techically superior product).
Intel's strong support of RDRAM will overcome many, if not all, of the objections. They're moving to RDRAM to gain the benefits that it will deliver now and in the future. RDRAM is an expandable technology (more channels, faster core memory, etc.) whereas it's actually SDRAM that is dead as a DODO bird. SDRAM can't go anywhere from here. Intel needs a memory architecture that can grow.
Again, do you think you know more than the engineers at Intel, Sony, Compaq, Dell, Panasonic, etc.?
Dave |
