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 (43210)	5/31/2000 6:57:00 AM
From: Dave B	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

No link that I can provide (got it through a paid-for service), but this is probably on the EN site: Was Choosing Rambus Wrong? Electronic News (1991), May 15, 2000 v46 i20 p8 By Brown, Peter Full Text Yes and no. The answer to this question really depends on whose side you are on. It also hinges on whether you believe Intel's claims about the need for increased memory bandwidth in the near future. But the question has been cropping up more and more lately, especially in light of Intel's latest problems (see story). Some believe that if Intel hadn't anointed Rambus as the next-generation DRAM, the company would not be experiencing the problems it is having now. However, I don't really buy that as the entire excuse for all of Intel's problems. Here's why: Intel recently has been maneuvering to expand into the communications, consumer electronics, and networking arenasafar outside of its core business of PC microprocessors. As a wise man once said, "To diversify is to invite disaster." That wise man was me. All kidding aside, diversification doesn't always spell doom and it's far from clear that Intel is headed for disaster. However, look at what has happened to Intel over the past 18 months. It has twice delayed a strategically vital chipset, it has had problems with its Pentium III roll out, it has struggled with motherboard troubles andato top it offait has let Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) take the lead in the megahertz race. Many of these problems are related to Intel's dealings with Rambus. However, is Rambus to blame for all of these problems? Could Intel solve all its problems simply by dropping its support of the memory technology? Dropping Rambus isn't the simple solution, though the next-generation memory technology accounts for a portion of Intel's struggles. Intel's real problem lies in focus and direction. A more focused Intelasuch as existed in the pastawould NEVER tolerate the kinds of problems we are seeing now. Intel has to take the blame for its problems. It has to take the blame for losing its focus and trying to become a larger Microsoft-like company, rather than being content with its $20 billion microprocessor business. Was choosing Rambus wrong? Again, yes and no. Yes, because it has contributed to the problems that Intel faces today. Yes, because DRAM makers now hold a grudge against the company. And yes, because the technology has yet to be proven as a viable, cost-effective winner. No, because the technology has yet to prove itself. No, because at the time, Intel didn't have many other choices since DDR was developing at a snail's pace and SLDRAM was not looking too hot either. And no, because eventually PCs are going to require the type of bandwidth that Rambus DRAM can deliver. Regardless, Intel has to grab hold of these problems and fix them. AMD is just waiting for Intel to make a grand mistake. If Intel continues to lose its focus, continues to look to other products, and continues to fail to deliver a high-speed memory technology to the masses, this could be the mistake that AMD is looking for. COPYRIGHT 2000 Cahners Publishing Company