Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (61739)	6/8/1999 10:01:00 PM
From: Earlie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

MB: Excellent comments on Rambus. A couple of other items that might fit on your list include the following: - The memory producers have to purchase very expensive test equipment to get into the RMBS game. This equipment is Rambus specific. If the sales are not huge, (and the memory producers think not), then those test equipment costs will be a writedown/off. They have enough of these already. - As noted earlier, the memory producers are aware of Samsung's leadership position. They do not want to be trampled in another price war that they cannot hope to win. - The box builders see this as another way in which Intel might be able to exercise monopoly-like control over their destinies. They have "been there", and "done that", and do not want to go there again. - The K7 chip looks like it may carve out Intel's heart, IF AMD doesn't drop the ball. I'm rooting for them, as their design team has done a heck of a job. There is plenty of excitement about this chip in the field. My best local cloners tell me that they expect it to blow the doors off the P3. Time will tell (like the next month). I don't envy the boys at INTC over this next few months. And guess what,....RMBS doesn't figure in this equation. I am completely baffled at the sheer nonsense contained in the M.S. report. It just doesn't make any sense to me, except from a "save my clients" point of view. Best, Earlie

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (61739)	6/9/1999 12:19:00 AM
From: MileHigh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

Michael, I know you are the RMBS Bear and I respect that! But I posted this to another bear and he said he wouldn't respond. Perhaps you could respond!? I am serious and do listen to reasoned arguements. TIA. ---------------- Why would Sony choose RDRAM over DDR for their upcoming PSII (or III or whatever they are going to call it) if; 1- DDR is so much better/faster? 2- Its cheaper? 3- No real foundry and equip would need to be deployed to produce such chip? 4- DDR will be in plentiful supply? CEO of Sony actually called DDR "unstable"- his words in a interview, not mine. Instead Sony is going to: 1-use DRDRAM 2-actually invest in the DRAM business to produce RDRAM (I think Toshiba, but I don't have the exact details, but I can post) 3-pay more for RDRAM (per your opinion) 4- and go through a bit of trouble to get it.... Why? I can only think because it is a superior memory architecture. Also, think about HOW MUCH Sony has riding on this new game console. This is a serious business decision on their part. They owe RMBS NOTHING!! In fact, their last console did not use RMBS. IF DDR was better, why didn't they chose it? I am long RMBS but often times challenge our thread, so I will really listen to your answer. Regards, MileHigh PS- If you start talking bit, bytes, latency, etc...I will just ask again, why didn't they choose DDR if all that data is true? Date: Jun 08 Last Trade 87 3/4 Change + 9 7/8 (+12.68%) Bid 87 7/16 Ask 87 1/2 Volume 3,459,5000 Prev.Close 77 7/8 Open 81 7/8 Day Range 79 5/8 - 88 7/8 Last Tick- Up Avg.Volume 1,214,6000 52-week range: 35 1/2 - 109 15/16