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 Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin
RMBS 92.72+5.2%3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Zeev Hed who wrote (68724)3/21/2001 11:53:28 PM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (2) of 93625
 
Hi Zeev Hed; Re: "Carl, since the patents were not yet published in April 1992, the industry efforts to get around the technology must have been based on "private peeks" under NDA."

Since 1992 is such a long time ago, I can't easily find links dating that far back, but as early as June 1992 the industry (Toshiba in particular) already had working samples of RDRAM chips. That would indicate that it is likely that everybody in the industry already was well aware of Rambus' technology.

The basic fact, Zeev, is that if you are trying to get the industry to use your new fangled memory interface, you don't do it by keeping quiet about it. Instead, you tell everybody about it, publish as many articles as you can get, get all the free press you can, and generally make yourself as well known as you can. I would predict that Infineon has no trouble whatsoever with any NDAs filed with Rambus. The basic reason is that Rambus is all about the interface, and the interface, in order for engineers to use it, must be public. NDAs would apply to the details of how the internal circuitry works, but it would certainly not apply, for instance, to the number of banks included in a chip.

-- Carl

P.S. Proof (from Rambus' own site) that RDRAM chips were running in June 1992:

June 1992: Toshiba demonstrates working 4Mbit RDRAM
rambus.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext