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: grok who wrote (31889)	10/9/1999 7:08:00 PM
From: The Prophet	Respond to of 93625

And of course, QCOM should have developed its CDMA chips to operate equally well on TDMA and GSM.

To: grok who wrote (31889)	10/10/1999 9:00:00 PM
From: Jdaasoc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

KZ: You have decided that the price of RDRAM is too expensive for the majority of customers tastes. . Your basic argument boils down to because RDRAM is higher priced it should have very little enduser demand strictly based on it's higher cost. Recently, the spot market for SDRAMs has shot up to a peak of 400% and has come down to about 300% of it's cost of manufacturing. If your previous statements are true that endusers will/should not pay 30% for faster performance of RDRAM, concomitantly endusers should scale back their need to configure their systems with 128 MB RAM and settle for 64 MB RAM since they are paying a now 3X higher price. However, we have not seen any diminished enduser demand for RAM since the price hikes. More RAM is always been a demand for endusers with multiple tasks running. God knows how many control panels applets seem to running it basic systems configurations today. Memory usage and bandwidth requirements are going to go up as far as the system performance will allow. I see nothing in the non-RMBS memory that rivals its scalability and COST EFFECTIVENESS OVER THE NEXT 5 YEARS. I mean COST EFFECTIVENESS because it recently pointing out to me by more than one memory industry players that a 400MHz RIMM module bought today for a Pentium 600B can be reused several years later in faster configurations. If I added up the cost of all the RAM I bought for my own system at home over the last 5 years it is extremely large expenditure of money. By my count it is: 8 megs of 30 pin SIMMs 16 megs of 72 pin fast page RAM 32 megs of EDO memory 64 megs of 66 MHz SDRAM 128 megs of PC100 SDRAM Each one of these at the time of purchase was a minimum of $150 and a maximum of $250. I must have spent $1,000 conservatively. However if RDRAM is successful, each purchase starting today and continuing over they next five years would be additively not money throw down the drain. If I continue to upgrade the microprocessors and mainboard as programs would dictate and Intel is assuming over the next 5 years, my RAM costs albeit 30% higher today will be significantly less than past 5 years and SIGNFICANTLY LESS THEN THE FUTURE YOU SEE with PC133, DDR200, DDR 266, and then DDR II I can can not put ANY credence in your simple minded arguments about cost and usage. I will leave your two other foggy points regarding suitability and reliability to posters with more EE background or the successful release of 820 and 840 chipsets. In conclusion, I hope you enjoy your retirement more than the combative fury you bring to simple web posts on the merits of new technology.