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 : JMAR Technologies(JMAR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: X-Ray Man who wrote (7190)	12/16/1998 1:54:00 AM
From: Falstaff	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 9695

I might as well chime in... XRL point source from JMAR or SAL could make a very big difference in XRL acceptance, and not just for small fabs. If either of these techniques allows an X-ray "lamp" of comparable or even smaller size than an excimer laser, fab layout will not have to change significantly. Some study of what politics might be driving EUV to the forefront is needed (at least for me), because I don't think it would be technical merit at this point. In any case, I don't take the Sematech poll as more than just that: an early poll. It should cause a little concern, but I think the next year will tell the tale. It is important to understand (are you listening JMAR?) that many in the semi fab business are not believers. Some evangelism is in order, and that will carry weight with the demonstration of a point source prototype with some reasonable hope for real production. I feel there is a critical race to be won here. The political battles will be severe; massive sums of money are to be won or lost. Without strong technical demonstration of capability that can be "inserted" sooner rather than later, these battles may be hopeless against the likes of Intel and Lucent. JMAR must remember "the quick and the dead...". Next, I have a kind of answer on how many BriteLights: a whole bunch for a single XRL source (maybe 10 or more?), and one every where there is a PCB drill, and who knows how many more. [X-Ray Man, you seem to know something about the physics of plasma based x-ray generation. Am I correct in my estimate that a bank of BriteLights will be required?] The potential markets (PLURAL) for BriteLight on its own, as an OEM laser, are very large. But this is also indicative of a problem: in many ways BriteLight may be a solution looking for a problem. I believe that astute product management will be required to spot the problems and introduce the solution to those trying to solve the problem, but when this happens, the score could be enormous. For example, new manufacturing techniques for flat panel displays, MEMS, or molecular drug dosing. One of the critical tasks for JMAR marketing is insuring that the scientists in the application domains know what is different about a BriteLight and how it can be exploited. A tough job. I don't see it being done right now, but it may be happening behind the scenes. On the new motion control "manager": light weight product, light weight engineering, light weight contribution to Precision Systems which is already tackling stuff Continuum could not touch, and no exploitation of his own patent, so it probably isn't worth much. Note that there is nothing in the Continuum product line that has anything to do with optics. Maybe the patent is something from the past, or maybe it is just a technical "gloss" without real applicability. I doubt seriously that Safarti is a "scientist" of any kind. We can hope that he is a good engineer and a better marketer, because the most important thing about this is the promise of some effective product management for the motion control line, which has been woefully lacking. I am hopeful this is also a good move, but does not carry anywhere near the same impact as the other recent additions (Martinez, Turcu, Schiele). My year-end spirits are up also, and I am somewhat more optimistic about JMAR because I see management starting to acquire the most important stuff they need: talent (and not just "scientists"). So, there is my 2 cents worth. Don't I wish that it made 2 cents worth of difference in share earnings! BTW, will someone please explain to this bumkin what the "ACE CONSENSUS ESTIMATES" and the "AQO" are, as referenced in the post from Gooch (#7153), or recommend where I can learn about this. And, as long as I am asking for education, can anybody tell me why the price is on a downward slide again, even when NASDAQ is surging upward???