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 (55117)	9/25/2000 4:06:37 PM
From: Dave B	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Carl, That is not because I don't have a reply, but simply because I don't feel like answering. Or maybe you just have no answer. Here's my original post (note that an older message has been deleted so the message #s are now 54899 and 54900): Message 14447053 Wow! It didn't take long to get hypocritical, did it? In message 54900 you say: First of all, you still haven't shown a link where VIA said that they were going to use Samurai. What you have found, (in a sort of roundabout way), is a link showing that Jack Robertson said that VIA was going to license the Samurai. I know that Rambus heads are a bit short of processing power, but you must have realized that there is a a few bits of difference between "license" and "use", and between "VIA" and "Jack Robertson". So apparently reports from secondary sources are not acceptable. Then in message 54901, you claim "VIA to make integrated DDR CPU. Engineering samples 1Q01" based on a slide from www.watch.impress.co.jp (and who knows where that came from). I know that you bears are a bit short of processing power, but you must have realized that there is a a few bits of difference between "VIA" and www.watch.impress.co.jp". I don't see Via saying anything about a supposed "Matthew 2" anywhere. Even worse, you commit the same sin you complained about in your very next post! But don't worry about doing it again. I'm sure the bulls will be happy to notice from now on when you're making claims based on information from a secondary source instead of the company directly. LOL! Don't bother answering -- there's nothing you could say that wouldn't embarrass yourself even more. I'll just take it to mean that unless it's a direct announcement from the company itself, it's not valid source for you. That's going to slow down your posting a lot, however. No more Jack Robertson articles, or Mike McGee, or Tom P., or AcesHW, Semico, etc., etc., etc. What are you going to use for references? <G> (But you do owe sylvester80 an apology for bitching about secondary sources meaning nothing and accusing him of being "short of processing power", then using one yourself as a shining example of being "short of processing power".) Hey, remember when you badgered me for days about the timing of my statement that RDRAM was dead, dead, dead? I ignored your posts for days, and finally shut you up with the complete answer. LOL! Your memory really is going; that wasn't me. Dave