how do I manage to break software all the time :-(
Ha ha. Because it is full of bugs and design faults. Don't worry, I am
always breaking software - it's what I'm paid to do.
Ian.
-Original Message-
From: dilwyn.jones
Sent: 18 October 2001 20:25
To: ql-users
Cc: dilwyn.jones
I can't hear any :o)
-
Norman Dunbar EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Database/Unix administrator Phone: 0113 289 6265
Fax:0113 289 3146
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
On 17 Oct 2001, at 20:07, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
Also, do not forget that the first microdrives were intended to be only
the start of a whole range of innovative new ways for mass storage.
Clive subsequently 'lost' a lot of his 'millions' investing in plant and
research to produce new devices
Wafer memory...
Wafer Scale Integration I believe he referred to it as at the time.
An ambitious project back then (maybe even today) because it requires
flawless wafer sized pieces of silicon. Even though silicon is the
earth's most abundant (or second or whatever) element, the cost of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] makes some magical things to make me read
} Wafer memory...
} Wafer Scale Integration I believe he referred to it as at the time.
B. Wrong. It refers to a bigger microdrive like device, with magnetic
tape. The same infinite tape trick as in microdrive, no rewind needed.
Even with current low cost silicon, there is still a high rejection
rate. That, as was said , cannot be afforded with a bigger chip.
Actually, bigger chips increase the number of rejects incredibly. The
reason is very simple: the basic idea behind chips in most cases relies on
all chip
In article 3BD046D3.18653.10B3805@localhost, Wolfgang Lenerz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On 17 Oct 2001, at 20:07, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
Also, do not forget that the first microdrives were intended to be only
the start of a whole range of innovative new ways for mass storage.
Clive subsequently
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], ZN
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Big snip :-)
The wafer technology was of course based on chip technology and design and
testing procedures of the time. Today it would actually be easyer to
produce them as things like mid-process testing, late stage metalization,
On 10/19/01 at 8:39 PM Malcolm Cadman wrote:
The wafer technology was of course based on chip technology and design
and
testing procedures of the time. Today it would actually be easyer to
produce them...
Very interesting, Nasta. As you say the technology is always moving on,
and what was
ZN wrote:
I wonder what happened to Sinclair's asynchronous microprocessor.
That would have been a great project too, especially since some
people at the Frauenhoffer isntitute (IIRC) developed it quite far,
using self-handshake logic instead of clocked logic.
The University of Manchester
10 matches
Mail list logo
