Thread,
They're going down kicking and screaming! <gg>
Seriously, if RMBS does not make this any more paletteable, then the dissention will come back to haunt them. It seems no one wants to do this (besides RMBS and INTC) and when they (DRAM manu's) get the chance, they will rub it in RMBS's nose in a big way.
Am I the only one who thinks this? Who's in RMBS public relations anyway <gg>
MileHigh
-----------------------------------
November 02, 1998, Issue: 1133
Section: Viewpoints
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do Rambus licensees have clause for concern?
Andrew MacLellan
Intel Corp.'s $500 million investment in Micron Technology Inc.-and the Boise, Idaho, company's subsequent capitulation to the Direct Rambus DRAM camp-could trigger a royalty windfall for technology architect Rambus Inc.
Having taken the king's shilling, Micron will do the king's bidding and accelerate its ramp-up of Direct RDRAM into next year's PC market. The investment will allow Micron to fulfill its capital-investment agenda and will likely guarantee that a few million more Rambus chips hit the street in 1999.
However, Micron's surprise endorsement comes at a time when other DRAM suppliers are starting to chafe under what they say is a moratorium on free speech imposed by Rambus as part of its Direct RDRAM campaign. According to several license holders, the Direct RDRAM contract that each vendor must sign contains a clause that prohibits licensees from criticizing the architecture in public.
This policy may have served a purpose in the early stages of design by confining engineering issues to the development teams, where they rightfully belonged. But with the Direct RDRAM launch date rapidly approaching, Rambus' spin control is causing dissension among chip suppliers.
Unable to broach unresolved issues publicly, these companies have had to rely on Rambus, and to an extent Intel, to speak for them. Even though both companies have done a credible job of keeping to their time lines-and claim to have responded to criticism with complete candor-memory vendors have privately professed unease at the degree of control Rambus and Intel are exercising over such a delicate technology transition.
Moreover, the Rambus policy has had a secondary and potentially more damaging effect by spawning a conspiratorial cottage industry bent on exposing what are believed to be hidden truths central to the Direct RDRAM program. Thermal issues, packaging availability, module costs, die size, production capacity-all have been identified at various times as representing a possible threat to the Direct RDRAM master plan.
Like a Louis XIV-era court intrigue, or an episode of "The X-Files," Rambus' censorship decree has prompted back-room gossip and allegations of cover-ups that have overshadowed its larger message.
If Rambus is to herd this new high-speed architecture to market-and if Intel wants to reap the performance benefits-then it's time to lift the DRAM community's gag order and let the information flow where it may. At September's Intel Developer Forum, the event's host encouraged suppliers and OEMs to work together to build a more honest supply/demand forecasting model. By allowing unrestrained dialogue among DRAM vendors, their customers, and the public at large, Rambus could push the industry toward that goal.
-Andrew MacLellan (amaclell@cmp.com) is EBN's managing editor, West Coast.
Copyright ® 1998 CMP Media Inc.
|
