RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: NightOwl who wrote (14379)	8/11/2009 12:40:46 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (1) of 14464

Well... It's not a manufacturer: businesswire.com But then... we haven't gotten to the end of 2009 yet either! There has been entirely too much smoke around 1T-FRAM for both NVRAM and DRAM apps in the past year. Some manufacturer has got to be sitting on a demonstration quality chip to push all the research and patents another step down the latter. QI: Message 24728120 Hitachi: Message 25065272 AIST(Japan): aist.go.jp Hell... I'm not going to even try to list all the people with a toe in this water. Suffice to say that anybody, who is somebody, who knows anything in this business has something good to say about a 1T-FeFLASH or 1T-FeFET memory device. Technically... there is no reason why it should be any harder to design and make a transistor gate out of PZT or some other ferroelectric than it is to make a capacitor or any other element of a CMOS friendly IC. T.P. Ma and SRC are obviously too far up the food chain to be left out. Their press release today is completely devoid of any information whatever to indicate they have anything which actually advances the technology beyond what Korea, the EU, and Japan have already done. Shoot RMTR and Symmetrix already have at least one 1T patent of some kind... IBM and the rest of the memory fab/producers have a boat load. The only significance of today's Yale press release that I can see is that Ma and SRC want to be on record as supporting a 1T-FeFET IP for DRAM replacement. The question is what has caused them to exhibit that desire? Anyway... outside those lines... the important bit here is that 2010 is becoming a very important year for ever more reasons... two of which are (1) the 22-18nm node and (2) the mobile SSD and enterprise storage applications: Message 24767382 Maybe the most important reason is the bankruptcy inspiring costs of squeezing yet "Moore" density out of the eternal process node shrinking which has already "killed off" (memory companies never really die, see Hynix, IFX, etc) Spansion, QI, and half of the island of Taiwan. At some point all these unemployed fab process EE's will redirect their efforts to the actual production of density improvements in the cell design itself... Maybe after they've relocated to the Yellow River Valley. <Hoo><Hoo><Haa> But maybe the very most important thing in all this is simply the fact that PCM/PCRAM and MRAM are not going to be ready for prime time by 2010... if ever. Personally I'm thinking they're already DOA... but I'm trying to be nice today. <Haa><pHooie><Hoo> 0\|0

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next