To: Ali Chen who wrote (40175 ) 4/18/2000 12:30:00 AM From: Dave B Respond to of 93625
Ali,Sorry Dave, but this "but" shows how deep your misunderstanding of the issue is. And the issue is that that for a system that physically fit into a single time domain the idea might be ok. Even a single multi-chip RIMM is very, very different. Your point was that Rambus didn't work until last year. My point is that it was the 820 chipset that didn't work until last year, not Rambus. Rambus worked well before that and the 840 chipset has worked fine. So your initial premise was incorrect.To stay current with _what_? Hype? Is it hype that they said they'd build Rambus-based systems, and they have? Is it hype if AMD says they're going to build DDR-based systems with chipsets that don't exist yet. It's just roadmaps, Ali. Maybe you hit your dates, maybe you don't. But don't believe for a second that they won't do it.Who is "Jeoff"? The one who cut out the third RIMM slot? I have to admit that one of the biggest frustrations in dealing with the Bears sometimes is the fact that they don't know the first thing about the business side of the business. Geoff Tate is the CEO of Rambus.The member of JEDEC seems to have the same clue as the guys who demoed that system. No clue I say. The simple answer to the good-looking signals is that you guys have no clue how to use basic measurement tools and which properties those measurement tools must possess to provide adequate informaion about reality. I saw many very "clean signals" that delivered garbage information <g>. Ali, that's a very ridiculous statement to make given that a) you don't know any of the people involved, and b) since RDRAM works at 400Mhz, they surely must have demoed it working before then at 250Mhz.If. Big _IF_. Life is one Big IF. And a s***load of little IFs.I must be drinking too much cheap burgundy this evening... Where can I send you a case? <G> Dave