Breaking News
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Peter Clarke
User Rank
Re: Good to be a product based company
Peter Clarke   8/27/2013 6:35:08 AM
I agree it is good to be product-based company. It certainly scales better than a service-based company.

However, one distinction that my Rambus interviewee was making, I believe, was between being a technology licensor (that teaches customers how to fish) rather than a patent licensee (that warns people that if they are thinking about designing a fishing rod they have to pay up). 

User Rank
Good to be a product based company
Sanjib.A   8/20/2013 1:12:18 PM
I too believe it is always good to be a product based company rather than doing just IP licensing if the product is right for the market. Again it is encouraging to see that RamBus is working on some product capable of IoT. This trend emphasizes that IoT is on the horizon, even though there are some speculations raised about its success in the article "Internet of Things need glue".

Peter Clarke
User Rank
Re: happy to hear
Peter Clarke   8/13/2013 5:19:44 AM
Rambus has signed some very big deals and achieved some very big settlements over the years.

In general it's patent licensing play would seem to have been successful BUT it is hard to build a relationship with customers through the confrontational legal system AND such settlements are "lumpy" which can be frightening for shareholders.

I think Ron Black has decided that it is better to be collaborative and take a little bit less out of the customers at each licensing bite but win repeat business, just like ARM.

But he also has to decide in which markets to play as a product or service provider and in which markets to be an IP licensor. You can't do both in the same market at risk of competing with your customers.



Peter Clarke
User Rank
Re: Which "products"?
Peter Clarke   8/13/2013 5:10:26 AM


I think you are right.

It may well be that Rambus will be looking for some strategic options for some of its technologies while looking for others that hang together well.

For example, I can imagine a synergy between memory interfaces, cryptographic protection, digital rights management and image computation. Light bulbs and displays seem to be in a different camp.

User Rank
Which "products"?
junko.yoshida   8/12/2013 10:54:16 PM
Rambus' plan to diversify its business beyond memory technology has been put in place since more than a few yearsa ago.

First, it started with lighting and display technology (see details below)

and then, Cryptography Research Inc. was also added a couple of years ago.

Now, image sensors, etc.

It is not clear to me that with such diversified technology fields Rambus seems interested in today, which ones will become Rambus' flagship products vs IP licesning.


User Rank
Re: good move?
daleste   8/12/2013 9:57:11 PM
Yes, I agree.  Having products to sell is always a better position than licensing IP.  You don't need as many lawyers.

User Rank
Re: Rambus Focuses on Products, Not Patents
docdivakar   8/12/2013 4:41:23 PM
Good move indeed. How ever, emulating an ARM-like business model will take changes to both R&D and marketing for Rambus. Licensing patents vs. Silicon-verified IP does take more R&D investment for the latter.

MP Divakar

User Rank
good move?
krisi   8/12/2013 2:51:52 PM
Whether that is actaully good move financially that remains to be seen...but at least this is a good move for my engineering soul ;-)

User Rank
Re: happy to hear
Sheetal.Pandey   8/12/2013 2:42:45 PM
Thats a good move by RAMBUS. Patent game is a distraous game unless your pockets are deep and you have the right lawyers.

rick merritt
User Rank
Perception and reality
rick merritt   8/12/2013 2:38:15 PM
Interesting neew direction.

At a recent meeting lunch meeting of licensing executives in Silicon Valley, Rambus was listed as one of the top five non-practicing entities by revenue, so they are definitely seen as a patent, not a product company.

Page 1 / 2   >   >> Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)

What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.
Like Us on Facebook
Special Video Section
LED lighting is an important feature in today’s and future ...
The LT8602 has two high voltage buck regulators with an ...
The quality and reliability of Mill-Max's two-piece ...
Why the multicopter? It has every thing in it. 58 of ...
Security is important in all parts of the IoT chain, ...
Infineon explains their philosophy and why the multicopter ...
The LTC4282 Hot SwapTM controller allows a board to be ...
This video highlights the Zynq® UltraScale+™ MPSoC, and sho...
Homeowners may soon be able to store the energy generated ...
The LTC®6363 is a low power, low noise, fully differential ...
See the Virtex® UltraScale+™ FPGA with 32.75G backplane ...
Vincent Ching, applications engineer at Avago Technologies, ...
The LT®6375 is a unity-gain difference amplifier which ...
The LTC®4015 is a complete synchronous buck controller/ ...
The LTC®2983 measures a wide variety of temperature sensors ...
The LTC®3886 is a dual PolyPhase DC/DC synchronous ...
The LTC®2348-18 is an 18-bit, low noise 8-channel ...
The LT®3042 is a high performance low dropout linear ...