SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Technology Stocks : Cymer (CYMI)

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Si Eng. who wrote (17294)5/1/1998 7:32:00 PM
From: D. K. G.  Read Replies (1) of 25960
 
Si Eng, thanks for clarifiying, I like the fact Betty brings these things to the thread to be debated.
It brings out some discussion that might not have occured.

As far as X- ray Lithography goes there is still an issue with a lack of throughput, you can't get the same WPH as with optical stepper.
That would increase your cost of ownership.

Is the above a correct statement ?
Bear with me, I'm a layperson in these matters.

The recent sub 0.13 uM breakthroughs with current optical tools
seem to contraindicate an early adoption of post optical lithography
techniques until they become absolutely necessary.

The 1997 SIA roadmap has DUV as a leading edge design good till 2009.
Granted that can change a great deal between now and then. My observations of this industry is: Squeeze the last uM out before you move on to a new lithography technique. I posit the Micrascan QML
an i-line stepper that cuts 0.25uM lines. Several years ago that
was not conceivable.

The same will happen with DUV. Several years ago
the limit was thought to be 0.13uM. Now in hindsight that barrier
has been experimentally overcome and on it goes... lower and lower
linewidths till the year..?

Beats the heck out of me.... qualitatively the DUV window has been
extending.

Regards,

DKG
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext