Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

System Integration Leads to MegaFunction Gadgets

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the wooo-megafunction dept.

nanotrends writes "The IEEE Spectrum is running a piece entitled 'Moore's Law Meets Its Match', about the system-on-package (SOP) approach to technology. The (SOP) approach combines Integrated Circuits (ICs) with micrometer-scale thin-film versions of discrete components, and it embeds everything in a new type of package so small that eventually handhelds will become anything from multi-to megafunction devices. This integration is actually developing at a rate faster than Moore's law." From the article: "SOP technology represents a radically different approach to systems. It shrinks bulky circuit boards with their many components and makes them nearly disappear. In effect, SOP sets up a new law for system integration. It holds that as the components shrink and the boards all but disappear, the component density will double every year or so, and the number of system functions in an SOP package will increase in the same proportion."

6 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Yeah by Anonymous+Crowhead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I liked my cell phone better when it just made phone calls. Smaller is better, but like Windows and even Linux these days, you shouldn't just cram stuff in because you can.

    1. Re:Yeah by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Frankly, if they're going to put a camera in it, i'd rather have a high quality 640x480 resolution. Pictures of that size are absolutely fine for most purposes if they are taken with a low noise imager with appropriate optics and aren't compressed as all get-up. If all you want is to share some cameos on the web or print off some 4x6s for the family, a good 640x480 is actually a lot better than a poorly designed 5MP camera.

      but wouldn't you rather have a really really tiny phone which you can add those things through equally tiny modular attachments if you so desire?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  2. Re:Reliability? by cnettel · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I would distrust wiring between discrete devices more than integrated functionality. Really, how often have you seen a chip or board malfunction due to not being seated properly, versus actual error in the chip itself?

    Any generalized statements about crashing are just that, gross generalizations. There is no reason to make components interdependent, just because they are integrated. The opposite is true, related components make sense to integrate, but then it's just a matter of what else you might be able to get into that package. It may even have its own connection to the power supply through separate pins, if you're that paranoid.

  3. The real problem is the interface. by khasim · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If they can make the guts of a phone so small that they can put 10 of them inside a case that is just big enough for me to comfortably dial, that's great.

    The real problem is that there isn't room for different interfaces on that box.

    The interface for a phone is different than the interface on your iPod. So even though you can cram the guts from both of them in the same physical box, you cannot do so while maintaining the interface of each.

    The same with adding a camera to them. The same with adding a PDA. The same with adding a game machine. It's really all about the interface (once you've solve the reliability issues). And right now, there isn't any way to get different physical interfaces on the device.

  4. Integration stinks by CatWrangler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A good example is the tv sets with dvd and vcr players built in. It's a nice package, but if your dvd busts, you have to give up your tv to get it fixed. Integration is nice, but it comes at a price. I would rather have nodules that are interchangable, flexible than everything in one package. You can have it all, or you can have nothing. Not a good trade-off.

    --

    ---
    When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--

  5. Re:jesus christ, what a bunch of goddamn luddites by OnanTheBarbarian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are correct. I am perenially amazed by the sheer lack of informed responses when there is a marginally technical, serious article on here.

    We got:

    1. "stuff is too complex already, what we need is better UI design". This is a non sequiteur - better UI design and clarity of function is an orthogonal issue to what this article talks about. It's as if the technology was going to be used to do nothing but assemble every last portable gadget into one poorly-designed mega-unit.

    2. "this is all about integrating such and so a microcontroller, SOC and flash memory": it's too hard to read the article and realize that we're talking about something a little more general, so let's just drop a couple vaguely-informed sounding buzzwords in there to sound superior. Read the damn articles, guys: Capacitors. Waveguides. Antennas. Crystals. Not just some gates.

    3. Some home-spun wisdom about how putting more functions in things makes them more unreliable. Yes, that's right, even since the 4004 computer chips have just been crashing more and more often. That's because there's no such discipline as computer engineering or electrical engineering. No-one has ever thought about these issues before today, on Slashdot. Perhaps one day a discipline might spring up around how to assemble digital and analog logic in a way that somehow encapsulates the properties of individual components.

    4. A couple random breathless quotes about Vinge and Kurzweill; with the usual level of irrelevance. Hey, at least these guys aren't sneering.

    I was faintly hoping for someone who knows more about this sort of stuff to analyze the very PR-ish seeming nature of the article - what's hype, what's reality. Instead, it's the usual undergraduate-level bluffing and gibberish.