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: Ali Chen who wrote (68549)	3/20/2001 4:17:56 AM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93625

I think you are too harsh on Intel. Although I am not exactly an unbridled supporter of Intel, but I do tend to think that Intel is a sort of victim here. No you didn't. No you did NOT say that to me! Are you trying to test the talons?! You want a piece of me fella!!<vbg> Seriously though Ali. Well quasi seriously anyway. This notion of yours and Carl's really burns my tail feathers. Suffice to say that I was breathing back then. I heard the hype. I read the press. I heard the call for this snipe hunt called the Dreaded Pin Count from '93 at least. I didn't believe it then and I don't believe it now. RMBS was nothing before it got 10 million and a secret deal from INTC. Even then it was only nickle and dime until INTC took its International Aid Show on the road to attempt to force the brightest memory designers on the planet to make a silk circuit out of the sows ear called DRDRAM. And both before the road show opened, in the midst of the performance, and after it closed - even after they had paid for the excessive development costs - even after they had chained themselves to a guaranteed market to this radiator of an memory IC - every step of the way everybody who could spell memory without a Mom & Pop accent or a Wall Street grin was calmly explaining that it was a wreck in waiting. Now are you telling me that in this whole wide world there was no one alive in 1997 who INTC held in higher regard for memory design expertise than the Boys from Los Altos? Andy Grove had converted to Church of Rambus and could not be deprogramed? Do you really mean that the P4 was just too far down the line in 1997 when this agreement was negotiated: rambusite.com That INTC couldn't have told RMBS to go fish? That they had deceived INTC into signing the first agreement and they certainly weren't going to tie their future to Deception-RAM II? That they couldn't have simply written off their 10 million "investment" and re-revised the road map in more than enough time to miss the '99 chip set fiasco, the uphill P4 roll out, and still be sitting atop the biggest chip set market? Well maybe Andy's folks are indeed that incompetent. ...But I will never under any circumstances believe that in 1997 INTC went into that contract with its entirely uncharacteristic, sophomoric, and utter cave-in to the virtual primacy of RMBS as far as its future options, corporate direction and success was concerned without knowing full well and within a high degree of certainty that RMBS had a plan for the torpedoing of the SDRAM DDR makers? You realize that that would mean that in 1997 INTC was not only convinced that: 1) The "uncontrolled" Fabs would be able to make D-DRAM II work; 2) And at a price YOU would pay; 3) That you could force them to make it if necessary; and 4) That you could prevent them from making the alternative SDRAM DDR work better or cheaper; as they all kept telling INTC they could do. Don't you think INTC would have, at minimum, directed some high bandwidth questions in the direction of RMBS management concerning these issues and the "little" problems that had popped up with DD-DRAM v 1.0? And if they did take such a minimally reasonable step, do you believe that RMBS would have withheld disclosure of the post 92 patent application program and their hoped for application to SDRAM and DDR? Was INTC forced to support SDRAM in PC-66/100 flavors? Were they doing it out of charity? Are were they satisfied that even if they were successful RMBS had a means to bring them into the portfolio? Even taking into account the human capacity for the recently discussed "ignoring of truths," and discounting fully the huge ego of a 1997 INTC, it is simply UNreal up in my tree that such questions weren't asked and such answers given. And this after already having seen the hated Big Iron guys get lost on their way world domination? No, no, a thousand times no. It is of course just all my speculation and opinionated perceptions of the curvature in this space. But if there is no knowing INTC role in this conspiracy,... well you might just as well tell me there is no conspiracy. ...And what fun would that be?(Ho Ha:8) 0\|0 - The Impostor

To: Ali Chen who wrote (68549)	3/20/2001 8:49:53 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93625

Re: In short, the whole multiplexed memory bus supremacy idea was a big mistake, and many are going to pay for this. Unfortunately. How can you say that? Intel has only dropped about $300,000,000,000 in market cap since they went with Rambus. :-) Dan