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 (58661)	10/23/2000 11:46:06 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

Hi all; Re Rambus' technical expertise in memory design, for those who have forgotten: Sep 6, 1999 Moves to pare Rambus costs while prepping chip set for SDRAMs -- Feeling the heat, Intel warms to PC133 support ... Geoff Tate, Rambus chief executive officer, said Rambus and RDRAM vendors realize that having so many on-chip memory banks made it more difficult to efficiently lay out the redundancy bits needed for respectable yields. Adding redundancy bits for each bank increased die size, hiking costs. Cutting redundancy bits can also raise costs by reducing yields. "If we knew then what we know now about the die size impact, we would have decided on fewer banks. But the issue is not just reducing the number of banks, it is making sure there is compatibility among the various DRAM vendors," he said. ... techweb.com Enough said, and straight from the CEO's mouth. If they had known. But they didn't, not on that issue, nor on a dozen others, and they completely screwed up Intel as a result. -- Carl

To: Bilow who wrote (58661)	10/23/2000 11:48:27 PM
From: jim kelley	Respond to of 93625

Re: "The suggestion that they could provide serious guidance to the engineers that have been responsible for most of the world's memory chips is ludicrous." Hmmm.... that reads like arrogance and disdain.<G> "The evidence suggests that Rambus engineering consists of a bunch of clowns." Hmmm....that reads like arrogance combined with envy. "I have repeatedly speculated that Intel management was the cause of the Rambus fiasco, and that the decision was not well supported by their engineers." Hmmm... that reads like arrogance combined with speculation.<G> Keep up the arrogant work!

To: Bilow who wrote (58661)	10/23/2000 11:59:09 PM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

INTC has INTC to blame for its own troubles not Rambus It appears Intel does not like the deal they cut with Rambus earlier, whose fault is that? It appears Intel no longer likes the Rambus business model now that they may have to pay royalties for failure to meet obligations, whose fault is that? It appears that DELL was smart enough to pre-order all the RDRAM they wanted but Intel would not do the same so supplies were not ramped up for the P4, whose fault is that? It appears that Intel is not going to collect on its warrants because it would not pre-order enough RDRAM because they were stupid enough to think that it would just happen, whose fault is that? It appears that Intel is not a good judge in selecting business partners (MU), whose fault is that? It appears that Intel should have been concentrating on the P4 rather than the cancelled low end nonsense, whose fault is that? Intel blaming Rambus for the deal they cut with Rambus, uh whose fault is that?