Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rambus Claims It Was Price-Fixing Target

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the business-unusual dept.

conq writes "BusinessWeek reports on the latest developments in the Rambus/Micron saga over pricefixing." From the article: "One e-mail, dated June 5, 2001, from Micron Vice-President Linda Turner to other Micron employees was in response to worries about prices on DDR-DRAM that had been falling. 'No problem!,' Turner wrote. 'We want DDR to explode in the marketplace so have actually been requesting Infineon, Samsung, and Hynix to lower their DDR pricing to help it become a standard (and drive Rambus away completely).'"

4 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. Rambus was overpriced and underperformed. by Otis2222222 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I still remember quite vividly the feud between Tom's Hardware Guide and Rambus that resulted in Rambus' stock price tumbling. Even if the other manufacturers kept their prices artificially low (which I doubt), Rambus was easily twice as expensive if not more than the same amount of DDR would have been. The fact that real world performance tests didn't back up the hype that Rambus promised was the nail in the coffin. If it was priced lower, they might have had something. I thought the technology had potential, but it's absurdly high price kept it from ever being realized.

  2. Those who can, do, those who can't, sue... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Again.

    If your product does not hit the market as it should, sue someone. Sue "Linux", to save your outdated product, sue your competitor for some meaningless patent hassle or, and here's the actually as far as I can judge ONLY new bit in this, some cartel building.

    What happened to good ol' free commerce, where the best product makes the buck? Been coffined and buried by lawyers and marketeers long ago, I know...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Price fixing...technically? by dvdsmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First, IANAL. Second, if some would RTFA, they would realize the price fixing here involved LOWERING prices. Historically, to my knowledge, accusations of price fixing have normally been made when separate parties agree to not compete and keep prices at a certain level. Here we have SOME competitors ecouraging each other to lower their prices below that of a common enemy, possibly at a loss in order to make better profits down the road. Laws against price fixing are meant to encourage competition, and IMO this is competitive behavior. Am I wrong?

    --
    "Build something idiot proof, and someone will build a better idiot" - Samuel Clemens
  4. Re:Or more likely... by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    RAMBUS wasn't really shit -- it had about a 20% advantage in workstation performance over SDRAM -- until DDR came out.

    Even at the price, it was still cheaper to buy RDRAM than a 20% faster CPU for a reasonable RAM config. (Although I'm glad my employer paid for it rather than myself, because those machines are impossible-to-upgrade lead balloons nowdays.)

    Hate to be the guy defending RAMBUS, but much of the anti-RAMBUS attitude was driven by Memory Cartel propaganda.

    --
    Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.