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: wallyam who wrote (4530)	6/10/1998 8:45:00 AM
From: Thomas P. Friend	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

To all who replied: I don't disagree with any of you regarding what the future ultimately holds. At some point, everyone will move to RDRAM based computers. My only points (although they are big ones) are 1) cheap, fast computers are delaying the time it will take to get there, for the reasons previously stated, and 2) when they do get there, the prices will need to be lower than what I, at least, had been expecting; lower prices means lower royalties. wallyam: a 300MHz Pentium II will run full screen DVD video admirably; DVD apps. that need processing power may need a faster machine, but I haven't seen any press about any such app being in the works. And if I were a software developer right now, I'd be foolish to develop such a piece of software; I wouldn't have much of a market when it was done, unless it was a four year project. mindmeld: voice software doesn't need a lot of power, and anyway, it's not a mass market app; it's much more of a novelty; it will take years to get the culture to accept the idea of talking to the computer. Video is a different story; video is a huge consumer of processing power, RAM, and transmission bandwidth. Look at the clunky virtual reality software that exists now; it's clunky because it needs more of everything to work better. This is one huge area where the next generation machines can make a difference. (Where do you see some of the best full motion graphics software?: Nintendo 64.) REH: Two points. First, I didn't say 32 bit apps wouldn't run faster on a newer, faster computer. What I did say is that my computer is so fast now that for what I do with it, I don't need it to be faster, and I won't be going out any time soon to be buying a new one. And I simply believe that I am currently with the vast majority on that. Second, just an anecdotal observation from my business. Right now, over 90% of all the RAM I sell, either in a new computer or as an upgrade, is EDO. The transition is just starting to be made to SDRAM! And I'd bet that most of the folks that follow this thread have EDO or slower RAM in the computers they are using. Everyone. I've always had a PC, from an 8088 with 640KB of RAM and a 10MB hard drive, to now. And since that first machine, back in 1983, every time it was time to get current, to get a decent computer cost somewhere between $2000 and $3000. As recently as 1995, I bought a beefed up Micron (90MHz Pentium, 2GB SCSI drive, 32MB fast page RAM) for $5000. I JUST BOUGHT, FOR ONE OF MY CUSTOMERS, A 266MHz PENTIUM II WITH 64MB SDRAM, AGP GRAPHICS, AND A 6.4GB HDD, FOR $950 (MY DEALER PRICE). AND I DIDN'T GET ONE FOR MYSELF BECAUSE I DON'T EVEN NEED THAT KIND OF POWER. Forget about SLDRAM and DDRDRAM; THAT is Rambus' competition. How many royalty dollars is Rambus going to be able to take out of a system priced like that. And the trend is toward EVEN LOWER PRICES. That's the gloomy side of the picture. The other side is that four years ago, the near top of the line computer was a 66MHz 486 with 8MB of RAM (many were selling with only 4MB). Four years from now, we will be well into gigahertz processor territory, and the machines will have 256-512 MB of RAM. Still troubling to me, though, is that I fear that the days of the $2000 price point for the majority computer is long, long gone. Happy investing, Tom