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: Bilow who wrote (36190)	1/4/2000 12:10:00 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

I already commented months ago, and extensively on Samsung's reasons for pushing RDRAM: Sept 11, 1999: #reply-11222926 "Samsung would love for Rambus to be the next memory standard. This is simply because they have the industry lead in producing them, relative to the other makers." (from the above reply) As far as the new RDRAM chips, they are still way behind DDR: February 22, 1999: Samsung engineer Hongil Yoon described a gigabit-density DDR design* that operates at 2.5 V and achieves a data rate of 333 Mbits/s.* techweb.com Also, #reply-11209990 "Also you should be aware that Samsung is gearing their SDRAM production to be wire bond option to DDR. This means that they can ramp up DDR very, very quickly, and it also means that any process improvements to their highest production line can be easily tested as DDR." samsungelectronics.com techweb.com My understanding of Samsung's position hasn't changed since before the Camino fiasco. The situation hasn't changed. Samsung would still like to see RDRAM succeed, but success in this has moved further away, not closer. And Samsung still hasn't demonstrated a gigabit RDRAM chip, as far as I know. As long as I am quoting from my predictions of the past, I should remind the thread that I told them that RDRAM used more power than DDR, and that this was a downside in the portable market (though I don't think that this one fact alone was enough to kill that market for Rambus): #reply-11209647 -- Carl

To: Bilow who wrote (36190)	1/4/2000 12:56:00 AM
From: Rachel M. Kuecks	Respond to of 93625

Thank you for your analysis and input. It makes it worth wading through the other worthless rantings (as found on the yahoo site).

To: Bilow who wrote (36190)	1/4/2000 1:02:00 AM
From: richard surckla	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

>>P.S. Why don't you go back through the thread and find a useful prediction you've made? I've never seen any. I really don't think that you know much about the industry, and are therefore not in a position to make any sort of useful comment whatsoever.<< I never claimed to know much about the industry and I don't make predictions, but I am in a position to make useful comments as I have been doing right along because unlike you I listen to THE EXPERTS and post their findings. For the same reason I don't listen to people that waste time in trying to scalp $9 (net) on a trade. Kind of like the janitor of Microsoft trying to tell Bill Gates how to run his business and how to avoid all the mistakes he's making... kind of lacks creditability. When you talk about doubling money all I can see $18 from the $9 you scalped.