To: SBHX who wrote (73754 ) 5/27/2001 10:40:31 PM From: Zeev Hed Read Replies (2) | Respond to The key to their IP is INTC for quite sometime (and possibly still) think that their technology is key in keeping the processor's speed as the system's bottleneck in lieu of peripheral devices like memory. If a system's performance is no longer limited by the CPU, but by other devices, there is no incentive in the market for paying premium prices for those high speed CPU and the CPU business becomes a cut throat commodity business. Was (or is) Intel right? I do not know, but if they are, and if Rambus continues and invest in making sure that memory is not the bottle neck, they will continue and get Intel's support and the bulk of the memory market may bear royalties for them. Sure they tried an end run on SDRAM and DDR since they felt their original disclosure covered a lot of the stuff later agreed upon by Jedec. Did they do it right, did they commit fraud, is their basic claim correct? I do not know. I have not spent five months studying their IP relative to SDRAM and DDR as have these two Italian experts. These experts felt that Rambus was right, Payne felt otherwise. There is a long battle ahead, but no one doubts that as far as DRDRAM is concerned their patents are clear. Their current prices is barely a 10 PE of some three four years ahead royalties on DRDRAM, assuming DRDRAM has only a 15% penetration. It is rich, under normal circumstances (if you assume that DRDRAM will fade away and that they will have nothing to replace it with), but as speculations on possible court victories, and possible continuous backing by INTC, and the possibility that DDR will meet its own problems coming to market. Not a bad bet, as long as you have a stop loss just under $10.
