Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Here we go again... Rambus Battle: Round 2

Tags:
Last response: in Memory
Share
August 3, 2006 5:10:54 AM

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/02/rambus_ftc_decision/

I forsee this as creating a lot of problems... again. *sighs* Just when everyone thought the whole thing was over. Farking US Govt.

More about : rambus battle round

August 6, 2006 10:02:08 PM

Quote:
Ah fock me sideways! :x

I'm willing to hire a sniper to take out their CEO and accountants; I believe those are the people responsible the company's aholness.


I second that notion.

How about getting everyone in the forum to chip in $5, we might get around $5000, and that's what they charge per head.

Or so Leon told me.
August 7, 2006 11:51:50 AM

Quote:
better hope law enforcement agents arent reding this.i will be happy with an ftc ruling that condemns rambus and imposes a fine.any penalties imposed by the courts will be great.


I have just been thinking more deeply about this, and i came to realize that if RAMBUS has to stop asking for royalties it should decrease the costs for Companies to make RAM. Hopefully reducing the costs for us, the customers.

That's just what i think though. Sadly economics is never that simple :-(
Related resources
August 7, 2006 1:35:04 PM

Quote:
Ah fock me sideways! :x

I'm willing to hire a sniper to take out their CEO and accountants; I believe those are the people responsible the company's aholness.


Why? You do realize that a) RDRAM prices were kept artificially high by the manuf. that did not want to pay Rambus's licensing fees and thus conspired to reduce supply to keep prices high and screw Rambus right? The memory manufacturers have also been slammed by the FTC for price fixing several times, they're pretty much as bad as Rambus, if I ran a company that had been scewed I damn sure probably would have tried to slip some of my patenteded tech into their industry standard (especially since there were no rules against it at JDEC).

Everyone makes Rambus out to be some evil company when in actuality they initially didn't do anything bad... the memory manuf. got what they deserved IMO.
August 7, 2006 2:45:03 PM

We could all be running RAMBUS right now if not for their shaaaaady tactics.

It's a shame that such a great technology gets the shaft because a couple of brains behind it wanted to force it down consumers' throats.

At least this is a good example/lesson to anyone who feels like giving using a new technology to create a monopoly.
August 7, 2006 3:42:45 PM

Quote:
Ah fock me sideways! :x

I'm willing to hire a sniper to take out their CEO and accountants; I believe those are the people responsible the company's aholness.


I second that notion.

How about getting everyone in the forum to chip in $5, we might get around $5000, and that's what they charge per head.

Or so Leon told me.
And cost-wise hiring a professional snipper is way cheaper than buying their superior engineers.
Give those trained US Marine snipper some whores and I bet they'll do it for free!

Hehehe
August 7, 2006 7:51:39 PM

Quote:
you werent involved in prior discussions here were you?there was a wealth of info provided by readers and members about rambus.virtually all the memory manufacturers accused rambus of patenting shared memory standard ideas in jedec discussions.
its highly unlikely that rambus is the sole contributor to the intellectual properties of memory technology,yet they sue for patent infringement at every turn.
this is why so many people think so harshly about rambus.the rest of the industry is capable of putting out useable technologies,where as rambus dumps overpriced garbage on the market,where in that do they exemplify a superior knowledge?
and when was the last time any of there offerings had mass market appeal?i have no knowledge of satisfied rambus users,but my knowledge is limited.
point is rambus is wrong,and need to be swatted.


I was happy with my RAMBUS. They always had faster timing and bus speeds than DDR, too. Maybe I was missing something, though.
August 7, 2006 8:49:34 PM

I could just be satisfied, too, because I don't want to feel like a shmuck for paying twice as much as everyone else for RAM. :) 

Then again, I have no regrets. I hopped on the RAMBUS boat because that's the only boat that sailed with Intel chipsets at that time. I was more than satisfied with the quality, though, and I didn't care all that much about the price.

I'd like to know if RAMBUS was really superior technology, or if what they sold was just stuff they could push out faster than the rest because it was 'proprietary'. Perhaps wiki has some info; when I get the time.
August 7, 2006 10:46:05 PM

Quote:
its highly unlikely that rambus is the sole contributor to the intellectual properties of memory technology,yet they sue for patent infringement at every turn


The thing you have to understand about Rambus is that it's an intellectual property company. The do not manufacturer their products. They make their living on patents and royalties. Rambus must aggressively defend its patents to survive. Whether or not the tech they're charging for was developed by someone else is irrelevant. If Rambus holds a valid patent to the technology, they're completely entitled to sue companies who use it and don't hash out licensing agreements first.

Where Rambus went wrong was trying to fight fire with fire and trying to fight it out in court (at the same time). Rambus did some illegal stuff, no doubt. But it pales in comparison to what Infineon, Micron, and others did to Rambus. Those companies set out to DESTROY Rambus and RDRAM. Period. All Rambus was trying to do was make an honest buck. However, that honest buck got in the way of how the memory industry worked according to Micron and others.
August 7, 2006 10:57:18 PM

Quote:
the high price ,if i am not mistaken is because the industry never adopted it as a standard.


No offense, but you are mistaken. The high price was due to all the memory manufacturers artifically inflating the price of RDRAM so that no one would adopt it. The idea was to make RDRAM more expensive so that OEM's would use royalty free DDR-SDRAM instead. Rambus never charged a royalty fee higher than 5% on RDRAM. Assume an additional 8-10% cost for memory manufacturers to use different equipment, and the total extra cost for RDRAM should have been around 15-20% (compared to SD and DDR-SDRAM). In some cases, the cost of RDRAM manufactured by Hynix was over 250%. That does not add up.

Micron, Infineon, and Hynix want you to believe precisely what you believe: RDRAM was more expensive because no one used it. And it's B.S.

Also, do not forget that Infineon, Hynix, Mircon, Elpida, and Samsung have all paid Rambus over $730 million in collective fines for price fixing the RDRAM market. Those fines were levied by the FTC itself. There IS no question that those companies priced fixed the RDRAM market. It IS a fact and it's already been decided by the courts. There are no appeals for that decision.
August 8, 2006 3:48:37 AM

lol

*slowly backs away from wusy...*
August 8, 2006 1:29:40 PM

Yeah I did some research on it. It seems like a lot of political BS that's just hard to sift through. Maybe RAMBUS broke out because the key memory players had unfair rules. Maybe RAMBUS was just too greedy and decided the rules didn't work in their favor. From what I read, it's hard to tell. And with the US courts, most of the time it's all about who you know and how fat your wallet is, so that's no help at all.

Either way, the situation hurts consumers because with memory companies getting sued left and right, that money has to come from somewhere, and it ends up coming out of our pockets. Especially when an entire industry is hurt, it isn't like it gives one company an unfair advantage.

Bleh.
August 9, 2006 5:24:36 AM

Quote:
Yeah I did some research on it. It seems like a lot of political BS that's just hard to sift through. Maybe RAMBUS broke out because the key memory players had unfair rules. Maybe RAMBUS was just too greedy and decided the rules didn't work in their favor. From what I read, it's hard to tell. And with the US courts, most of the time it's all about who you know and how fat your wallet is, so that's no help at all.

Either way, the situation hurts consumers because with memory companies getting sued left and right, that money has to come from somewhere, and it ends up coming out of our pockets. Especially when an entire industry is hurt, it isn't like it gives one company an unfair advantage.

Bleh.


Agreed. That's why i said this new decision is bad. Just when we think things are FINALLY settled this crops up. All said, I really do wish Rambus would just go away. I feel bad for them because they were royaly screwed, but at this point it should be evident that Rambus will never get a DIMM in a modern PC again. They're tech will crop up in buses and consumer products (like hypertransport and PS3), but never again in PC memory. Too bad really because XDR-RAM truly is a superior technology.
August 9, 2006 5:54:45 AM

Quote:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/02/rambus_ftc_decision/

I forsee this as creating a lot of problems... again. *sighs* Just when everyone thought the whole thing was over. Farking US Govt.


Actually, I think it is round 3,385,781... but then I may have missed a few lawsuits, so this number might not be totally accurate.

RAMBUS, nice technology (QDR initially, now eight bits per clock)) but as a corporate citizen... total piece of sh*t...
!