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: unclewest who wrote (10348)	11/25/1998 11:26:00 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93625

naz down + very very low volume + rmbs up 2 = very bullish looks like we are setting up for another strong run up. milehigh what do you think? unclewest

To: unclewest who wrote (10348)	11/25/1998 2:21:00 PM
From: wily	Respond to of 93625

Jim and Unclewest, below is a CMP Media article concerning the "alleged" gag order. Considering the credibility of the source (CMP), I think the story is probably based on fact. (BWDIK) I also don't think its much of a compliment to compare Rambus' tactics to Microsofts', whether the comparison is warranted, I don't know. Seems to me Rambus and Intel are doing what they have to, to get the job done. Regarding whether the technology has real merit, I would offer two points: Intel truly wants to foster the age of bandwidth in PC's and needs a memory technology that will work for this. If another, less-bandwidth-enabled memory technology were to gain the upper hand, then a whole generation of computers might get built without the need for high-capacity processors. Intel could be in serious trouble in that scenario. So, I think that Intel chose Rambus for its superiority as a bandwidth enabler. The other point is that I asked a tech genius on the AMD thread what he thought of Rambus technology (this guy is involved in the design of CPU's!!) and he said it was a good design if it can be manufactured cheaply enough. I know Tom Pabst of "Tom's Hardware Page" has a hard time seeing the merits of Rambus but, you can't please everybody. I'd like to ask Scumbria, (the guy who gave me the positive opinion) to critique the Tom's Hardware essay, but he's indicated he's sick of the Rambus discussion. Too off-topic I guess?? Maybe Tenchusatsu, hmmmmm.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- November 02, 1998, Issue: 1133 Section: Viewpoints -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do Rambus licensees have clause for concern? Andrew MacLellan Intel Corp.'s $500 million investment in Micron Technology Inc.-and the Boise, Idaho, company's subsequent capitulation to the Direct Rambus DRAM camp-could trigger a royalty windfall for technology architect Rambus Inc. Having taken the king's shilling, Micron will do the king's bidding and accelerate its ramp-up of Direct RDRAM into next year's PC market. The investment will allow Micron to fulfill its capital-investment agenda and will likely guarantee that a few million more Rambus chips hit the street in 1999. However, Micron's surprise endorsement comes at a time when other DRAM suppliers are starting to chafe under what they say is a moratorium on free speech imposed by Rambus as part of its Direct RDRAM campaign. According to several license holders, the Direct RDRAM contract that each vendor must sign contains a clause that prohibits licensees from criticizing the architecture in public. This policy may have served a purpose in the early stages of design by confining engineering issues to the development teams, where they rightfully belonged. But with the Direct RDRAM launch date rapidly approaching, Rambus' spin control is causing dissension among chip suppliers. Unable to broach unresolved issues publicly, these companies have had to rely on Rambus, and to an extent Intel, to speak for them. Even though both companies have done a credible job of keeping to their time lines-and claim to have responded to criticism with complete candor-memory vendors have privately professed unease at the degree of control Rambus and Intel are exercising over such a delicate technology transition. Moreover, the Rambus policy has had a secondary and potentially more damaging effect by spawning a conspiratorial cottage industry bent on exposing what are believed to be hidden truths central to the Direct RDRAM program. Thermal issues, packaging availability, module costs, die size, production capacity-all have been identified at various times as representing a possible threat to the Direct RDRAM master plan. Like a Louis XIV-era court intrigue, or an episode of "The X-Files," Rambus' censorship decree has prompted back-room gossip and allegations of cover-ups that have overshadowed its larger message. If Rambus is to herd this new high-speed architecture to market-and if Intel wants to reap the performance benefits-then it's time to lift the DRAM community's gag order and let the information flow where it may. At September's Intel Developer Forum, the event's host encouraged suppliers and OEMs to work together to build a more honest supply/demand forecasting model. By allowing unrestrained dialogue among DRAM vendors, their customers, and the public at large, Rambus could push the industry toward that goal. -Andrew MacLellan (amaclell@cmp.com) is EBN's managing editor, West Coast. Copyright ® 1998 CMP Media Inc. Message 6236319