#RAM pricing
10 messages in this thread
Ron,
The word 'excuse' implies something made up, but not really true, or
something that may be true…but isn't the real reason.
RAM availability was extremely tight last year, and still isn't as good
as it had been 2 years ago. Many manufacturers had supposedly long term
contracts with chip manufacturers (not just distributors…manufacturers) and
the manufacturers simply refused to honor those contracts. The US trade policy
on chips (I forget what it was called) also put some limits on what
could/couldn't be brought in. Most of the US chip manufacturers quit making
RAM chips…only TI and Micron keep it up and they couldn't supply the demand.
Not only that…new machines like the PS/2 models came out with huge
appetites for RAM and IBM had the bucks to influence whether they got chips or
not, plus their own plant that could supply them with some of what they needed.
For CBM to have brought out the A2620 with no RAM would have been
absurd in my opinion. The RAM shortage was, and still is real. It's easing,
but not over yet.
I do NOT know for a fact that RAM shortages was the reason for the
delay…I do know that's what I've heard (along with the FCC certification)
from 'normaly reliable sources'.
Don
I suspect we'll never know the true reasons why the 2620 took so long to hit
the streets. I tend to disagree over the ram delay issue, but that is quite
subjective. Ram was absurdly tight, and to some degree still is.
Ron
Ron,
How can youpossibly disagree with the 'ram delay issue'. It was well
documented in the various trade magazines, newspapers, and most importantly of
all, in the price lists of distributors, wholesalers, and retailers. It is not
a 'subjective' matter at all. It was a shortage of ram, for many reasons,
causing what ram was available to become very high priced indeed. (around here,
256K chips went from $4.00 to over $20.00 within just a few months)
You make subjective judgements on what constitutes an excessive delay between
first working prototype and retail sales for a product, treat those judgements
as if they were immutable laws of the universe, then call factual, well
documented conditions 'subjective'. I will never figure you out, of that I am
certain.
-larry
Ron,
Are you arguing with yourself? First you say you disagree with the RAM
issue, then you agree it was tight … as you put it 'absurdly tight'… you
can't have it both ways can you?
Don
Don,
I *believe* the "ram shortage" was more acute for the 256K chips, not the
1 meg chips.
Lloyd
Lloyd,
They were both quite scarce. While the price didn't climb as high
(porportionately) as the 256K chips, there really was quite a shortage.
-larry
Lloyd,
More acute for the 256K chips…because manufacturers cut their 256K
production to open up 1Meg production…..but the shortage still existed for 1
Meg chips. It still exists…that's why the price still hovers in the $30
range for a 1 Meg chip.
Don
Where can one get 1 meg chips for $30? That's the best price I've seen.
Clint,
Advertised in the back of computer magazines.
Don
Lloyd,
That's not what I've been seeing! Meggers were harder to get than 256K's
were. (and THAT certainly wasn't easy!) The one meg chips are becomming more
available NOW and 256K's are becoming less available. In fact, the current
forcasts (if they mean anything 😉 claim the megger DRAM shortage should be
over by June '89. But production of 256K chip is being reduced drasticly.
-Dean