NLST was the true innovator of the current design architecture of the DDR4 Load Reduced DIMM, when they came out with HyperCloud DDR3. Their design solution did away with the single chip central address and data buffer design pretty much like Inphi's iMB product for DDR3. HyperCloud was different because it rerouted the data lines and data strobes to 9 buffer chips placed close to the circuit card edge connector. NLST called these devices "isolation devices" ( recall the court trial ok.....the ID chip and the other was called the RD) NLST used this RD chip as a "registering clock driver" which controlled the switching of the 9 data buffers. So you all are thinking OK so what? Well by removing the buffers from the centralized single chip design (also known as "advanced memory buffer" patented by Intel) NLST moved them closer to the card edge connector, which basically shortened the path that the data had to travel from the memory DRAM chips on the board to the card edge connector.. They no longer passed through the "central single chip" buffer. At higher operating frequencies that single centralized chip had a downfall which was heat. as well as instability at higher data transfer rates. The HyperCloud DDR3 from NLST solved this issue. THIS is where NLST holds the patent for the "Distributed Buffer Architecture". The patent has been upheld in the PTAB. In the trial, NLST showed that Diablow was not entitled to use the ID or RD chips. OK...fast forward...DDR4 LRDIMM being sold by all the large OEM including Samsung.....they all use the very SAME design ideas that NLST originally used on the HyperCloud product, and some of the differences, on the DDR4 are more advanced SDRAM memory chips, more robust Registered Clock Driver, (NLST RD chip), and higher capacity circuit card, more input/output contacts. AGAIN...this is NLST design/technology/intellectual property that has been adopted by the industry. They have their hands full, fighting to assert their rights.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
.....and I most certainly recall Pippy adamantly stating that "it didnt matter where the 9 buffer chips were placed, or...just because NLST used 9 buffer chips does not have anything to do with architecture or patent. His true understanding of NLST technology and what they were able to accomplish, shows he is a fool with a big mouth. Yes NLST has issues right now with revenue, but they are clearly a leader with the technical aspects of this innovative solution to the issues that confronted Fully Buffered DIMM's. Go search, look at all the DDR4 Load Reduced DIMMs being offered for sale, by the large OEM's, for use in the new cloud servers. They all use the 9 buffer chips (..isolation device, ID) close to the card edge connection. Some are visible on the front of the card, some OEM are placing them on the back side, as the JEDEC standard spec 21C, allows for this. (finalized and published Sept 2014)
ARLINGTON, Va., USA – MAY 26, 2015 – JEDEC Solid State Technology Association, the global leader in standards development for the microelectronics industry, has announced that its JC-45 Committee has approved the first standards for support of “hybrid” DDR4 memory modules which are defined as modules that plug into standard dual in-line memory module (DIMM) sockets and appear like a DDR4 SDRAM to the system controller, yet contain non-volatile (NV) memories such as NAND Flash on the module. These hybrid module families are referred to as Non-Volatile DIMMs, or NVDIMMs, and they may share the memory channel with other standard DDR4 DIMMs. Publication is expected later this year."
NLST will likely appeal to Appellate Court. Judge likely felt that she had no choice, otherwise cause chaos, she conveniently blame the jury. It's not over if NLST appeals.
My sentiment as well...the word is used on this board in a rather loose way. If facts are presented in a positive manner, it is not a request for people to go out and start buying the stock. It is made with the intent to put out information for others to research on their own time and then make their own decision. If the person is incapable of understanding the technology or facts behind the stock, he shouldn't be buying stock in the company. I could care less if anyone here on this board bought the stock or not. This board is not the center of the stock market universe and the price of a share of this stock does not rise or fall because of what is said on this board.
the judge will issue a ruling on the motion via an order and it will be published in the court record available through Pacer.
the first standards to support DDR4 NV DIMM-N were just approved by the JEDEC committee recently. If you all remember Hong mentioned DDR4 NV was something they were actively working on with their hybrid product. The spec will likely be published by JEDEC in the 4th Q. Keep in mind it takes time for the ball to get rolling. The NVDIMM SIG is the group NLST is a member of, guiding its developement.
Never have anything good to say, are overly critical,and when they make a mistake they always blame someone else. They can never be optimistic because the inherent traits of being a loser will always prevail. A loser is not measured in dollars. A loser can never admit a mistake and move on, keeping his mouth shut. We see a few here.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Pippy knows nothing about cash, he doesn't have any.
No DA...I didn't say they are for the DDR4 servers....you are an idiot...NLST is offering EV3 also as a different product for a PCIe solution...not servers....There you go again....making up BS to sound smart....and you make a fool of yourself. There are people on this board that don't know what these products are, or know the technology, but you aren't gonna bs me into thinking you know. Total DA you are.
he did not say that....he actually said DDR4 NV when asked about the microsoft deal. He said DDR3 and DDR4 activity.
Go to sleep ...you get dumber the more you post,
DDR3 LRDIMM has no load reduction --- is not a statement by me, it is a question to you based upon your statement that there is "no load reduction moron". In fact...you say that the buffers are "non-meaningful" and that is wrong. They are very much so meaningful to LR-DIMM . your statement is further proof of your ignorance.
That stooge Pippy seems to think that because they were awarded $2 that was the extent of the damage. The DA must not know that $2 is all the law allows for. Regardless, the jury did find that NLST was damaged by the use of the ID chip
Just watch and see. Diablo court case was just the precursor and a necessary starting point for NLST. They are not big enough right now to take on everyone, and time will run its course...eventually leading to some sort of revenues from the IP. And it will surely be retroactive. These companies using the "distributed buffer architecture" design in their current DDR4 LRDIMM products have been put on notice and likely already have been formulating / negotiating agreement terms. Don't worry about the stock price.....That's the market makers game currently in place.