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.

Technology Stocks : Rambus (RMBS) - Eagle or Penguin -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave B who wrote (25364)	7/20/1999 3:15:00 PM
From: capt rocky	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

if you think intc hasn't evaluated 133 you are mistaken, they did and chose rdram. 133 doesn't solve intc's problem of how to speed up their faster future processors. we've been over this many times. nothing has changed. intc doesn't want 133. by the time any 133 gets to market rmbs will have a foot hold and the new architecture will be in place. the "we will evaluate" statement is a delaying tactic. rmbs is strong today in spite of nas. plunge. a friend of mine who builds pcs. for a living just told me not to upgrade my pc. he said sell it or donate it and wait for rambus because any money i spend now will be wasted because i can't realisticly get more speed with presently available processors. he ain't dell but he's hep. re: stuart steels buy. anybody can say he bought or sold. when and at what price stu. if you don't want to answer i understand,i just won't believe you. rocky

To: Dave B who wrote (25364)	7/20/1999 5:02:00 PM
From: John Walliker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Dave, Actually, ISA was the first PC bus. There was first an 8-bit version, then a 16-bit version followed. I still have the IBM PC/AT Technical Reference on my bookshelf (and the PC/XT one somewhere). It has complete circuit diagrams of the PC and a full assembler listing of the BIOS. This level of detail was invaluable when designing interface cards, because there was little else available. However, there were no timing diagrams, which led to a degree of interpretation and hence sometimes unreliable designs. IBM tried to stop the clone manufacturers and if I remember correctly even wanted retrospective royalties in relation to "ISA" bus designs before they would grant Microchannel licences. The situation does not seem to be comparable. John

To: Dave B who wrote (25364)	7/20/1999 11:44:00 PM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Bad example. PCI overtook VESA based on technical merit, not on the power of Intel. Carl

To: Dave B who wrote (25364)	7/21/1999 12:15:00 AM
From: Scott D.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Dave, Intel, et. al. proposed the EISA bus... Actually, I believe Compaq created EISA.

To: Dave B who wrote (25364)	7/21/1999 11:21:00 AM
From: DownSouth	Respond to of 93625

In about 1993, VESA came out (proposed by Compaq et. al.). Intel decided to support the PCI bus. VESA had a 1 year head start, and disappeared in less time than that after PCI came out. That was only 5 years ago. Intel still has that kind of power. Dave, perhaps Joe will get the point. PCI is to bus design what Rambus is to memory design. The parallels are very clear. PCI took the bottleneck of the bus so that Intels faster CPUs could offer benefits. PCI was a open architecture that others could build to. RMBS is excactly that same idea, except RMBS owns the IP. I remember how the technoids debated that PCI was not needed, because everyone was just doing word processing. <g>