What is Digg?43 Comments
- tsunami643, on 11/27/2007, -1/+33After RDRAM collapsed and I was stuck with 128mb of it, I lost all faith in Rambus.
- dgendreau, on 11/27/2007, -1/+26Buried because its Rambus. They can go choke on a RIMM after what they pulled.
- inactive, on 11/27/2007, -1/+22didn't rambus fail?
- ScornForSega, on 11/27/2007, -1/+19Die Rambus, die! And take your dummy RIMMs with you!
(also, lol @ intel for buying into that *****) - tekrat, on 11/27/2007, -1/+13Yes, the only thing that has kept Rambus alive has been various patent lawsuits.
- aywwts4, on 11/27/2007, -0/+11I paid extra back in the day, not only for the privilege of RD-Ram (since it was Allegedly faster) but also for an extra pair of dimms and to consolidate the existing ram on one bank so I could "Upgrade when it got cheaper"
One pair of 512 RD Ram sticks is 250 dollars.
In conclusion, I would never ever buy anything named rambus ever again, they are a company that needs to die. Thats step number one to progress.
(Regarding the allegedly faster bit, me and a friend had the exact same computer model back in the day, his was ddr, mine was rd ram, everything else was identical, his was twice as fast as mine. I think the RD ram may have had high speed Something for advertising purposes, but its latency was really high and made it's performance suck.) - blackmage439, on 11/27/2007, -0/+9Yeah, Rambus has some ideas, eh? Like keeping all copyright and patent information under its own roof, and charging exorbitant licensing fees to companies who wish to manufacture their expensive chips? No thanks. I'm happy with my DIMMs.
- mooninite, on 11/27/2007, -4/+12Yes, Rambus made a mistake with marketing RDRAM 5 years ago. Heck, I had the second-gen 16-bit PC-1066 chips. I had 768 megs of it by the time I moved over to DDR2. It took 3 years for the DDR SDRAM guys to catch up in terms of speed.
However! They have some extremely promising technology and to let their past cloud your judgment is to ignore a MAJOR advancement in computer technology. This looks to be a great leap forward, even if it's with Rambus. Oh, and *cough* the PS3 is using Rambus' XDR memory. If you thought they weren't getting any money. - inactive, on 11/27/2007, -2/+8"RD's gone too Sir. Got himself killed in Stores, didn't even know it. DDR ate him down to the bone."
- augustz, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5I'm sure they have some ideas, which they will propose as an industry standard, and then patent privately :) Here's hoping they don't get as much traction in the future...
- InorganicMatter, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5Can Rambus please just go away?
- tuka, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5Intel & AMD both have nulti year licensing agreements covering a broad range of Rambus technology. Intel's good idea was to use the tech and not get bogged down in litigation and the *****.
Its your friendly neighborhood memory makers who jacked the prices up by not ramping the tech as fast as they promised. Intel had made a 500 Million dollar investment in Micron (memory maker) about 10 years ago now to ramp the tech. Micron took the money and didn't ramp, instead stole the tech and screwed intel. Intel then sold the interest in Micron for good profit before the micron shares collapsed when they and the other memory makers were collaborating on a price fixing scheme.
The DoJ has been after the memmory cartel for these actions, know your enemy. - SteveMax, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5That's 640kb for you, mister.
- aywwts4, on 11/27/2007, -0/+5Did you get stuck with a $1500 computer containing Rambus technology that you couldn't justify buying even two sticks of ram to upgrade? If you did and you forgive them, alright, cool thats your choice, but if you never got shafted paying $250 for two sticks of 256 or $500 for a gig (Today!*) you don't really have much to forgive.
* http://www.dealtime.com/xPO-Peripheral-Enhancement ... - bradleyland, on 11/27/2007, -0/+4I already bought one PC that saw its RAM prices QUADRUPLE in a matter of two years. Considering RAM is the most likely upgrade I'll make to my PC, they can shove their terabyte whatever right up their ass.
- HappyScrappy, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4This is the company that failed at making their own proprietary standard for RAM, and so instead used submarine patents to try to extract money from those who made a successful standard, DDR.
Don't post this crap.
Ars shouldn't even write this crap.
This company deserves to die. - mtekk, on 11/28/2007, -0/+4More like intel won't be suckered into relying on Rambus ever again. It's a fool me once kinda thing
- inactive, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3....fool me once... shame on me.
and that ***** ain't happening again! - drlha, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3He's quoting First Blood. Rambo/us.
- kevcool, on 11/28/2007, -0/+3Rambus and SCO were cast from the same mould. This "groundbreaking bandwidth" talk is a clever ruse where the ultimate goal is litigation. Let's see who gets caught up in *this* one.
- Jugalator, on 11/27/2007, -0/+3Huh? Sure, I know Bill G did (but maybe really didn't) "say" that, but having said that... Huh?
- aywwts4, on 11/27/2007, -1/+3And the Nintendo 64 used rambus ram as well, so what? its sort of a non-sequitur. They leverage their position to make their products considerably more expensive to consumers, and they will probably do it again in the future. I don't care if they managed to make a good deal with one or two massive corporations, I care about knowing if I buy a 200 dollar motherboard and 200 dollars in ram, that in the future I can upgrade my ram for a reasonable price without throwing everything else away (As everyone griping on this thread probably had to do, either that or bend over.)
- mtekk, on 11/29/2007, -0/+2@moonite:
I never owned RDRAM, and have only touched 1 system that had it. Forgive me for not knowing the intricate workings of a failed memory system for which you seem to have great affection for.
Regardless, AFAIK CRIMMs were for when you had a system that had to run in dual 16bit channel mode and didn't want to have RIMMs in. Wouldn't that cut the available bandwidth in half, eliminating the dual channel mode since the one RIMM is not there? - rcollamore, on 11/27/2007, -1/+3they did come out with something better, it's called sdram/ddr/ddr2/gddr(x), xdr, etc..etc..It's all Rambus technology. It's amazing how clueless people can be. The truth is out there.
http://www.news.com/Rambus-wins-306-million-from-H ... - mtekk, on 11/28/2007, -1/+3"Heck, I had the second-gen 16-bit PC-1066 chips... It took 3 years for the DDR SDRAM guys to catch up in terms of speed."
Well, no PC1066 with 16 bit data paths is only pushing about 2133 MB/s bandwidth at 533 MHz clock speed. DDR266 did this with a 133Mhz clock and 64Bit data path. Rambus ran hotter, was more expensive to produce, had higher latencies, and was all around crappier than DDR. DDR-266 was out a long time ago, AMD was pushing it while intel was still using PC-133, that was almost 7 years ago. RDRAM was out about 6 years ago. There was no three year difference. JEDEC got there first. - skubiszm, on 11/27/2007, -0/+2Call me stupid, but what are you quoting?
- rootofunity, on 11/27/2007, -1/+3Rambus' only real problem was they were to friggen expensive.
- rudy23, on 11/27/2007, -0/+1that article like totally went over my head.
- scabbers, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2Intel has better ideas. I wonder who will win out? lols.
- dgendreau, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Its only Rambus technology in the sense that they attended the SDRAM standards committee and secretly patented key technologies of the standard while they were still attending. Then they used those patents to block SDRAM manufacturers while they tried to force their expensive RIMMs into the marketplace.
- inactive, on 11/27/2007, -1/+2***** REAMBUS
- petard, on 11/28/2007, -1/+2its "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
- unusualbob, on 11/28/2007, -0/+1royalties are a bitch
- mtekk, on 11/29/2007, -1/+2Yeah, then dual channel the DDR and you can double that number too. Not all 16-bit RDRAM was dual channeled, remember the CRIMM cards?
- SupaSolly, on 11/28/2007, -0/+1***** RAMBUS stll expensive as hell
- dgendreau, on 12/05/2007, -0/+1Well that and the fact that they were litigious monopolistic submarine patent wielding whores... A lot like SCO really.
- UnstableMind, on 11/27/2007, -1/+1No wonder my fscking PS3 cost 599.00 w/*ONE* controller...
/end rant - Jugalator, on 11/27/2007, -1/+1I'd forgive them if they come up with a good product. Why shouldn't I?
I don't really see the point of avoiding just out of a principle like so many Diggers here. :-p - mooninite, on 11/29/2007, -1/+1C-RIMMS were for DUAL-CHANNELING! You had to have them to complete the channel. Good lord are you dense?
- mooninite, on 11/28/2007, -2/+1Except that 16-bit RDRAM was *DUAL-CHANNELED* so double your bandwidth numbers.
Since you obviously know NOTHING about RDRAM, how does that make you even remotely qualified to post a comment? Oh because this is the Internet. - sint4x, on 11/27/2007, -2/+1let alone 64K of RAM!!
- eddiela, on 11/27/2007, -2/+1Ditto.
- CraigJ, on 11/27/2007, -5/+1DDR3 ought to be enough for anyone
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is