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 (42502)	5/18/2000 6:31:00 PM
From: gnuman	Respond to of 93625

DDR Summit Anyone interested in the view from the other side might want to go to the archive site. The first two hours were foil presentations, and the presenter's pretty much followed the foils. For those not wanting to spend two hours listening to the foil presentation they'll get about as much by just thumbing through the foils. The round table and panel discussion were the most interesting. (Fast forward to about two hours into the realaudio player session). The panel discussion included representatives from Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Samsung, Micron and Infineon for the memory producers; Via, ALI and AMD for the chip set producers; and Nvidia and ATI for graphics. Among other things, the panel discussion covered shipping status and projections in more detail than the foils. I'm not going to provide a synopsis. (I imagine the press in attendance will publish their views). I wonder if we're not at one of those "inflection points" that Grove refers to? If you're interested, here's the archive link. (Simple registration required). netseminar.com

To: Dave B who wrote (42502)	5/18/2000 6:42:00 PM
From: Eric K.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

Dave-- Your second point about marketing and technology is actually incorrect. No one has ever said that the technology is irrelevant. A post by pompsander just two days ago is at Message 13723511 : "Let's leave the relative performance strengths of the various Rambus/DDR iterations to the side for a moment. Frankly, that is where I think they should be all the time......because they don't matter." p.s. I apologize if I'm not getting the joke, but 'Mwa' should be 'Moi', French for 'Me'. I had not realized. <ggg> It's an inside observation, which would not be entertaining without a lengthy write-up. I think most people on SI are reasonably intelligent. Attempts at being condescending should be left for other channels. -Eric

To: Dave B who wrote (42502)	5/18/2000 6:58:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 93625

Dave, Intel, with all of the resources at its disposal will do to AMD what it's always done -- keep it pinned down "just enough" to keep the DOJ off its back. It's happened before and unless something has changed, it'll happen again. For example, while I don't hold AMD or INTC, I suspect that at least some of the factors in the past have changed -- in the past AMD usually shot themselves through lousy production Intel's ability to stifle competition has always been based on having a higher MHz processor than their competitors. They no longer have that advantage. AMD has never really had production problems. The issues they had manufacturing K6 were similar to the PIII problems Intel is currently having. They were trying to push a design past it's natural clock speed, and got lousy yields as a result. This is a design problem rather than a manufacturing problem. Scumbria