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 (38789)	3/23/2000 1:26:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl, <The technology is still quite dead.> We missed you during the run-up. What's your spin on Intel's reaffirmation of Rambus support back in February? So far, future projects from Intel which support Rambus include: 1) Intel's upcoming Willamette processor, demoed at 1.5 GHz, paired up with RDRAM upon release. 2) Intel's Timna processor with a native RDRAM interface, paired up with SDRAM upon release through a translator, then going native RDRAM in 2001 or whenever RDRAM prices drop to an acceptable level for the low-end. 3) Intel's upcoming 870 server/workstation chipset for McKinley and Foster, supporting both RDRAM (workstation) and DDR SDRAM (server). Perhaps Intel is mad for continued support of a "dead" technology? Or is there method to this madness? Tenchusatsu

To: Bilow who wrote (38789)	3/23/2000 2:43:00 PM
From: Barry Grossman	Respond to of 93625

Carl: Re using muxes to effectively double the data rate on a wire, and patentability thereof. You said, Engineers have been using that technique for a very, very, very long time. I personally designed it into a chip back in 1988, (an XC2064 which output 72MHz data using a 36MHz clock), but the idea is obvious to anyone with skill in the art, and has undoubtedly been done repeatedly since the 50s, and described in many public documents, including data books and text books. Then you said, Nor did I say that Rambus' patents are in the public domain, go back and reread what I wrote. I did. If you are not saying that, then what were you saying? Barry