NVDIMM, is NVDIMM-N, HyperVault is NVDIMM-P.
Chuck presented the SNIA breakdown of NVDIMM, "NVDIMM-N is a memory mapped DRAM with battery backup. NVDIMM-F is a memory map flash, DRAM is not system mapped. NVDIMM-P is a memory mapped flash and memory mapped DRAM"
HVault is DDR4, but it isn't NVDIMM. Chris guided that their NVDIMM DDR4 was targeted for early 2015 release, but I assume they have been working with MSFT on enhancements.
When the spectre of an injunction was facing Netlist, back when Smart Mod filed in 2012, the sentiment was that the market would be wary of buying HCDIMM because of the injunction, it certainly didn't help sales. People here said Netlist was done. Now that SanDisk is facing a stronger patent infringement case, the market is still going to be wary of buying UDIMM in mass quantity.
worldavi, Netlist has guided their DDR4 NVDIMM would be out 1st Half 2015. It is not HyperVault. They guided that they worked with Microsoft to incorporate certain tech elements into their future NVDIMM design, so I assume that is what will happen with DDR4 NVDIMM, could be why it is somewhat delayed, and if so, it is a valid reason for a delay, working with someone like MSFT who wants certain features.
This is from the Hallum conference in 2014, Sept. "Q. HyperVault (for servers)… 3rd quarter ’15?
A. (Chris Lopes) We’re saying second half. Third quarter would be my hope.
A. (Chris Lopes) We have a lot of customers waiting for it, waiting to get a prototype, waiting - they’re giving us input today. Features they want.
Q. Demand is there.
A. (Chris Lopes) Demand is there, yeah.
A. (Chris Lopes) Well, I think we show billions of dollars. I think RBC had a chart out for ULLtraDIMM that estimated somewhere between $2 and $6 billion FOR NEXT YEAR in that space. And I think we can take a pretty sizable chunk of that, not all of it, but a piece of it, so I think it’s hundreds of millions potentially.
They are talking about next year revenue, no?
They invented NVDIMM and that is closer to revenue than HVault.
"working to ready this product for production early next year" Since there are two 'versions' of HVault, when he says, "ready this product", is it referring to the custom design for the phone or the server HVault?
From the context of the quote, it reads to me that the custom design in for the mobile phone would be getting silicon in a few months. HyperVault for a mobile phone is not the same as HyperVault for a server. They guided last September that HyperVault would begin shipping in the 2nd half 2015, arond Sept/Oct.
They are using HyperVault tech in this mobile phone development, they guided that HyperVault itself would be out in Sept/Oct.
On the quarterly call. "We are also at early stages with a large mobile carrier to improve performance and functionality by using HyperVault technology. We are expecting early silicon sometime over the next few months and will be working to ready this product for production early next year"
Don't get stuck on the mobile phone aspect of HyperVault, that is but just one custom design off from the main design intended for servers, there are multi-million servers out there too.
And it is ironic that SmartMOD and crew would try to label Netlist as a patent troll when they did the same thing to Netlist back in 2012.
People should understand that the potential of an injunction against HCDIMMs was weighing on the minds of customers as well as the current case would be weighing on the minds of UDIMM customers.
SMART's U.S. Patent No. 8,250,295 Was thrown out by the USPTO because Smart withheld prior art from the examiner to get it issued. They then used the ill-gotten patent to try to slap an injunction on Netlist, which was denied. That is all a part of this upcoming patent case.
Bashers had a field day with the SmartMOD injunction request, that was ultimately denied.
EX PARTE APPLICATION dec 10th, 2012
Plaintiff SMART Modular Technologies, Inc. applies ex parte to continue the January 10,
2012 hearing date on Defendant Netlist, Inc.’s Motion to Stay Pending Patent Office
Reexamination [Docket No. 107]. SMART respectfully requests that the hearing on Netlist’s
motion to stay be continued to February 21, 2013, the same day as the hearing on SMART’s
pending motion for preliminary injunction. Under Federal Circuit law, the Court must rule upon
a pending motion for preliminary injunction before or at the same time that it considers granting a
motion to stay
SMOD isn't bluffin'. They will get relief from Hongkok the copykokcat.
Back in Sept 2012, SMART Modular has filed a lawsui Case No. 2:12-cv-02319-MCE-EFB, accusing Netlist's HyperCloud of infringing SMART's U.S. Patent No. 8,250,295 (Thrown out by USPTO in Dec 2012). SMART has also asked the court for permission to file an immediate motion for preliminary injunction to prevent Netlist from selling HyperCloud products in order to stop the alleged continuing infringement by Netlist. The complaint filed is the most recent step in SMART's ongoing defense of its intellectual property related to "rank multiplication" for DRAM memory modules referred to as Load Reducing or LRDIMMs.
This patent trial overhang is not going to help SanDisk make the market feel confident about doing business with them for some time, it is still an issue.
The patent trial "preparatory phase' commences April 22nd, but there are some patent re-exams that will likely take place prior to the trial officially beginning.
And also know, SmartMOD FILED FOR AN INJUNCTION AGAINST NETLIST in Nov. 2012 with only their 1 fraudulent patent. Netlist has much more "ammo" to return the favor should it come to that.