Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates Message Board

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: tinkershaw who wrote (42757)	5/17/2001 5:42:48 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) of 54805

"I was also very intrigued of how Infineon over a period of 3 years kept asking Rambus for more and more information about their inventions, even after Rambus basically said, "look, buy it or we shall stop sending you specs."" I have a very simple theory about this. The original Rambus-1 worked only on paper, or in a one-two-chip demo. To fit it into mass-manufactured PCs, the memory must meet certain requirements: the channel must be long enough to accommodate manufacturable packaging, modules must be socketed, etc. Therefore it would be quite natural to ask questions how inventors are proposing to resolve the issues. Apparently they did not have compelling answers. Today we know that the Rambus-1 has failed in PC market. Only after 7-year-long efforts from real manufacturers - Intel and others - the Rambus memory was able to meet the PC requirements. The multiplexed bus was returned to its status quo - separate address and data lines, time domain crossing effect was discovered, and proper control was invented (Intel patent), etc. etc. It has happened in 1996, AFAIK. Do you see holes in this theory?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next