Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Cymer (CYMI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Si Eng. who wrote (17294)	5/1/1998 5:36:00 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 25960

SAL's propaganda brings Si Eng. out of lurk mode. I love it! BTW, how does SAL or anyone know what 193nm PSMs will cost six or seven years in the future?

To: Si Eng. who wrote (17294)	5/1/1998 5:41:00 PM
From: Scott Violette	Respond to of 25960

Elisabeth, I think it is near impossible to guess the PRODUCTION cost of DUV masks for 193nm when the industry gears up for them. Current prices are just a reflection of their current R&D status. Someone just posted an article basically saying that DPMI and other mask makers do not have the R&D budget to ramp up future DUV masks now. Basically, a chicken and an egg problem. If you start ordering them, we will make them, and the cost will come down. The bottom line and main decision point will be "Do I stick with optical litho which I know will work or stick my neck out for X-ray". In the risk averse manufacturing mentality, you know what the answer is.

To: Si Eng. who wrote (17294)	5/1/1998 7:32:00 PM
From: D. K. G.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to 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