Formerly About Applied Materials 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 : Formerly About Applied Materials

AMAT 220.28

-6.4%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Teri Skogerboe who wrote (15048)	1/26/1998 3:24:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (2) of 70976

Teri - Most of my case goes back to if I'm a chipmaker and I can effectively increase my capacity by ~ 75% by shrinking from .35 mu to .25 mu, then I'm "sitting pretty" for the next year or so. I will spend money when I NEED to, not just because I wish to make all the equipment suppliers happy. Anyone, please tell me why this argument doesn't work?? Sure. The most obvious problem first. The upgrade from 0.35 to 0.25 requires new equipment. That, in itself, should be enough to keep the equipment companies in the black since that kind of upgrade was largely postponed in '96 and '97. However, I'll concede that stellar growth isn't likely until entire new fabs need to be built. Second, by the same reasoning, there should never been any new plants built. The problem with the reasoning is that, not only do the number of components sold increase 20 to 30% per year, the number of transistors on each component increase 60% per year (Moore's law). The sum total is 1.25x1.6 = a doubling in number of transistors shipped every year. Shrinking alone can't keep up - it keeps up only with the number of transistors on any given chip. Clark

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next