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 (43553)	6/6/2000 5:08:00 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 93625

Hi all; More DDR wins: GeForce2 cards at Computex: watch.impress.co.jp Photographs of motherboards at Computex. Note dearth of RDRAM based boards: watch.impress.co.jp -- Carl

To: Bilow who wrote (43553)	6/7/2000 4:07:00 AM
From: Dave B	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl, re: The motherboard list you posted. Your conclusions are once again absolutely not supported by the data you post. Seriously, do you have any background in either logic or statistics at all? All your list shows is that not all motherboard manufacturers have jumped on the RDRAM bandwagon yet. No big surprise there -- I'm pretty sure everyone here is aware of that. As for your claims: Out of the 73 motherboards, 17 support RDRAM, or 23%. This is not 73 motherboards -- it is 73 listings of companies in 3 categories. Since some of the manufacturers are listed in multiple categories, it's not even 73 distinct companies. And, most importantly, the list does not list multiple mobo offerings by any individual company, so the total number of distinct motherboards may be significantly larger than 73. 73 is a meaningless number. So something like 11% of Intel's desktop motherboard types will likely be RDRAM compatible. (This is not to say that 11% of Intel's desktop machines will go out with RDRAM. It could be more, it could be less, depending on production amounts.) Yes, so your 11% number, based on a flawed 23% number and a WAG at 50% market share is completely and totally meaningless. You even point that out right afterwards, in your parenthetical remarks, yet you make the statement anyway. Why would you make a useless statement, then admit that it's useless? Unless you can tell us the market share for each company using each chipset, you're performing a flawed analysis on a bad set of data. Kind of like saying Seagate has 16% of the hard drive market because there are 6 hard drive companies in the market. In any case, this vividly illustrates the interest of the motherboard community in alternatives to RDRAM memory. Unfortunately, the only thing it vividly illustrates is that you'll twist anything around, no matter how flawed the logic, to support your anti-RDRAM cause. Other than that, you absolutely cannot draw any conclusions about why the data is what it is. Maybe the companies not supporting the 820 don't have the testing capabilities available yet. Or they are simply waiting to see how successful it's going to be (especially since the aftermarket prices are so high still). There are any number of reasons, not just yours. Dave p.s. I couldn't get your link to The Register to work, but I'm sure that's not your fault.