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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (117303)	6/23/2000 10:43:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580256

Elmer, Intel claimed that RamBus was a superior technology but a review of the matter forces me to admit that I have not yet heard a convincing argument to that effect. Intel's thinking was not entirely flawed. At higher clock rates (2GHz+) high bandwidth memory will be needed. What Intel didn't understand was how difficult it would be to manufacture and test (TM Elmer) DRDRAM and DRDRAM memory controllers. Scumbria

To: Elmer who wrote (117303)	6/23/2000 12:28:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580256

Elmer, thanks for the gracious reply, but I'm not worried about technical matters anymore. It seems highly probable that even with Intel's backing Rambus would just fade away in a few years time. Even before this SDRAM patent nonsense started, the memory makers didn't seem to want to have anything to do with them anymore. The thing is, Intel is known for its army of lawyers as much as anybody, and had more to do with standardizing SDRAM than anybody I can think of. So, what's the deal there? Did they know all along what the deal was with Rambus patents? It would be pretty nervy of Rambus to go after Intel and those 200 million BX chipsets, but if there's money to be had, why not? It'd be poetic justice, anyway, though everybody but the RMBS shareholders would be sure to lose. Cheers, Dan.