Tue, Sep 2, 2014, 8:14 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Rambus Inc. Message Board

  • rambusince99 rambusince99 Sep 2, 2011 1:07 AM Flag

    RDRAM is actually pretty darn good

    At least according to the largest memory manufacturer in the world, who is objective and no longer has to defend itself in antitrust court:

    http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/products/dram/Products_RDRAM800Mhz_40nsforInteli850E.html

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • gregory.lynn@rocketmail.com gregory.lynn Sep 5, 2011 10:02 PM Flag

      Rambusince99 should definitely log in with his 30 aliases to give this post 30 1 star ratings, that way everybody will think that there are actually 30 real life losers who live and breath this crap.

      Oh wait, he already did that for ALL posts that disagree with him. This is really pathetic dude, grow up.

    • "Speaking of which, there was never a cartel. That word is demeaning in and of itself. JEDEC is a consortium, but some of its members crossed the line when it came to discussing prices"
      _______________________________________________________

      I'm sorry you don't like the pejorative term "cartel." Unfortunately for the MM's that's the category they fit into. The shoe fits.

      car-tel - (kar-tel') n. An association of independent businsses organized to control prices, production, et.

      Then there is Michael Dell, who complained to the DOJ about what appeared to be cartel pricing, an observation that later proved to be true.

      "Prices increased to the point where, during April 2002, Michael Dell said his company, PC maker Dell, began to buy memory from second-tier manufacturers. The company did so to avoid what Dell described as "cartel-like behavior" by certain memory makers. He did not name them, however."

      http://news.cnet.com/Government-finds-witness-in-RAM-price-fixing-probe/2100-1004_3-5347423.html

      This was after the Cartel lowered prices sufficient to remove RDRAM from the competitive landscape (Linda Turner, remember her?) and then nearly over night tripled prices on DDR, much to Michael Dell's dismay. BTW, this conduct was independent of and outside JEDEC.
      ________________________________________________________

      "Rambus ambushed the DRAM industry claiming patent rights to technology already built into JEDEC standards"

      This one was disproven by a jury in Hynix v. Rambus already, by a jury vote of 37-0 in favor of Rambus. The jury found no such evidence, and found no malconduct on Rambus' part while at JEDEC. You are really out of touch. Do you really think that little 300-employee Rambus company could trick a consortium of multi-national corporations? Common sense...

      http://rambus.org/legal/hynix/HynixJuryVerdict2.txt
      ___________________________________________________

      "Micron's management came forward and cooperated with the DOJ fully when it came to the admitted price fixing, the employee responsible was acting on his own."

      You are not so naive as to believe that MU's part in the conspiracy was limited to one person are you? If so, tell me why Steve Appleton and Mike Sadler refuse to come to SF to testify and set us all straight on all those meetings they had with the "competition," choosing instead to cower in Boise. How about that Sadler deposition in the DOJ v. Swanson (Hynix) where Mikey was the "star witness" who the jury later called a "lying sack of $hi+." (not my words, hers). I'll post that in a minute.

      As to someone at MU acting on his own - not remotely believable. Also not what MU agreed to in their leniency agrement with the DOJ:

      "The confession of wrong doing is truly a corporate act, as opposed to isolated confessions of individual executives or officers."
      _____________________________________________________

      And do you really believe somehow that Rambus's document destruction trumps that of MU? MU employees shredded documents even after litigation started, and went to jail. What was in those documents? Do you think that Rambus may feel prejudiced by the spoliation? Oh no, that's different, right?
      _____________________________________________________

      You are invested in MU, and that is the really risky place to be. MU could be facing bankruptcy if this matter goes Rambus' way. Even with a 50% judgement, MU can not absorb the liability after mandatory trebling. So tell the truth here Greg, where is it really risky to have your money?

      Nobody should invest or not invest in any stock based on what they hear in a chat room, from me, you or otherwise. Due diligence and personal responsibility is a requirement when investing.

    • gregory.lynn@rocketmail.com gregory.lynn Sep 4, 2011 2:35 PM Flag

      "Rambus has asserted a 350 and 352 objection to all of Micron's designations. Micron wants to try to establish that Mr. Steinberg gave incorrect testimony about when he was employed by Samsung just before he came to Rambus. The issue is whether or not there was an overlap in his employment and his time as an outside Counsel for Rambus, and that goes on for pages and pages and Perry has no idea why that issue is relevant at all to this case.
       
      Shields responded that Mr. Steinberg testified in January of 2001 that he started working for Rambus in August 1998 and among the very first things he started doing for Rambus was preparing for patent litigation, involving SDRAM. When Rambus began preparing for litigation is a disputed fact in this case.  Mr. Karp denied it.  Other people denied it.
       
      Later it was revealed, through subsequent depositions, that, in fact, he started working for Rambus earlier than that, in June 1998, while he was still working at Samsung; and that he, at a minimum, misspoke if not lied about it in a declaration in a letter to Samsung and in testimony. So his start date of when he started working on these things for Rambus is relevant, and the fact that he arguably misrepresented it is relevant.
       
      Perry specifically named the start date as June 30th.  According to Shields, the dates are important because Rambus’s first shred day was the very beginning of September in 1998 and there is a very big difference between after the first shred day and before the first shred day."
      ----------------

      Not relevant??

    • I have one of those gateway 7200 right now that i am tearing your theroy to piecies. This gateway has a 256 front side and 1066 back and is hooked to a 10 meg. High speed is used every day and it just screams.if you will remember that the first ddr that came out to try to push out rambus would lock-up all the time until the cartel stoled enought of rambus's tech to make it run right. If it was not for rambus ddr in any flavor would not be here. Thief of ip was what the cartel built their companies on and now they will pay. And by the way s-dram was also taken from rambus and it's hookup with intel. What will piss you off even more is that thie r-dram computer is a 2002 gateway! Jstud

    • gregory.lynn@rocketmail.com gregory.lynn Sep 4, 2011 10:54 AM Flag

      Spoliation has a lot to do with this case.

      Rambus LIED under oath and said that they cannot be held liable for the absence of specific documents due to the fact that they did not anticipate litigation.

      The latest from court on Friday was that the date from which they cannot be held liable is getting pushed back, because the lawyers were actually working for them BEFORE they claimed, so those famous shred days will now be coming back to haunt them.

      The documents which RMBS are unable to produce which could have been used to prove innocence for Micron et al, are NOW considered to be SPOLIATED.

      This will be a mistrial. Hope you didn't bet the entire farm.

    • SORRY FOR THE DOUBLE POST .

    • Spoilage has nothing to do with the [at] case . this trial is based on price fixing an attempting to drive rmbs from the market place . the unfair treatment of rmbs to force them out of business . rmbs's i.p.
      was disruptive an a game changer, this threatened the cartel . i say cartel because they [all together] made a concerted effort to tilt the playing field . it would appear they [cartel] is about to pay dearly .

    • Spoilage has nothing to do with the [at] case . this trial is based on price fixing an attempting to drive rmbs from the market place . the unfair treatment of rmbs to force them out of business . rmbs's i.p.
      was disruptive an a game changer, this threatened the cartel . i say cartel because they [all together] made a concerted effort to tilt the playing field . it would appear they [cartel] is about to pay dearly .

    • View More Messages
 
RMBS
12.30-0.11(-0.89%)Sep 2 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Exelixis, Inc.
NasdaqGSTue, Sep 2, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
Guidewire Software, Inc.
NYSETue, Sep 2, 2014 4:00 PM EDT