Hi jim kelley; Re the reliability of RDRAM machines. That someone would get even three machines that run beautifully is not surprising, and doesn't mean anything in terms of the reliability of RDRAM machines. You have to look at large numbers of machines to find the kind of failures that are a consequence of having insufficient margin in the design.
The problem is that if 5% of the buyers return a machine for defects, the manufacturers profit margins are toast. Even if 5% of RDRAM machines were flaky, the odds would be very much against your getting one. But after having six months to exercise the bugs, I would expect that the DELL machines are running fine. (That may not be the case after they have extra memory installed in them from a vendor other than DELL.)
I should note that I am not here suggesting that the post Ali Chen referenced is true. Of course I have no idea. But I wouldn't doubt it at all, this is exactly what I would expect of RDRAM machines, particularly when they are well stuffed with RAM and running memory intensive applications for long periods of time.
In all this I am repeating myself. I said the same thing back in September when the Camino bug first came public:
I am sure that the vast majority of Dell's early production Rambus machines are running beautifully, under normal operating conditions. I, myself, would be willing to buy one of those "defective" RDRAM systems. I would be sure to operate it in a stable temperature environment. I might, for instance, let it warm up for five minutes before making it do anything. I would be very careful if I ever touched those RIMMs, to clean them carefully before putting them back. I would keep dust from getting in the machine. I'd love to have one, at the right price, but I'd also like to wait for an Athlon, which I believe will kick rear end.
#reply-11363837
-- Carl |
