We are now seeing Serial ATA replacing the old IDE/Parallel ATA and the dawn of Serial PCI Express for graphics cards to replace the Parallel AGP standard. Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) is in the works and is looking to be released within the next 2-3 years, with transfer rates as high as 600MB/s, marketed at high-end servers etc. USB 2.0, Firewire, Ethernet, V-Link, MuTIOL, HyperTransport®, RapidIO are all serial-based, so it is safe to say that the computing industry is moving away from Parallel data transfer methods. Why then are we still using DDR memory (current max clock on single channel 533MHz) when a Serial alternative has been around for 4 or so years? RDRAM or RAMBUS, was initially developed for use with the P4 and Xenon processors. It has single channel clock frequencies of 1600MHz, more than double that of the current fastest DDRRAM modules. RAM makes computers work faster, and the faster the RAM and the more you have the more effectively it can use the Chips FSB, hence the faster the computer can operate. Why not then have 8GB of RDRAM operating @ 1600MHz, rather than 4GB per channel operating @ 800MHz. I know RDRAM has suffered at the hands of a lack of consumer support due to its high cost, but with widespread adoption as has occurred with DDR theres no reason that this superior Serial product should fall by the wayside. Even the Specs of DDRII from JEDEC dont live up to those of RAMBUS. The Shift is to Serial, so why should RAM be left behind when it is so critical to system performance.