Almost every reply seems to think that the only chips in existence are digital. If you are thinking of a digital design then, as the others said, FPGAs are the way to go - certainly for prototyping.
If you need an analogue device or want chip scale packaging of your device, then an asic would be more appropriate. It is possible that FPGAs are available in very small packages but I'm not very up on that.
If you're in Europe, the Europractice scheme provides access to Multi-Project Wafer (MPW) runs to reduce overall fabrication costs. They also provide the software and design kits that allow you to make your designs.
My price breakdown for a 10sqmm chip in the AMS C35B4 process (0.35um, 4 metal, 2 poly, high res) with 20 devices in CSOIC28 packages:
Full Europractice membership (annual): €900
Cadence IC package single license: €1800
Cadence IC package maintenance (might not be applicable for the first year): €1150
10sqmm of AMS C35B4 silicon @ €720/sqmm: €7200
20 packages @ €52/package: €1040
Total: €10,940 or €12,090
Non of the prices include any local taxes.
They also do low volume production, but I don't know anything about the pricing.
So how to bring that down? You could save €1800/€2950 on software by using free alternatives such as on this
page. You'd have no end of problems with design rules and layout vs. schematic verification but it would be possible. Normally I'd say allocate two months of hard graft at the very least using the normal tools and with support from someone who knows what they're doing. With inadequate tools (no design rule check/layout vs. schematic) you would have to at least double it and you still might have errors.
Don't be influenced by your opinions of current design processes. We use a 0.35um process all the time. It's perfectly adequate for what we want to do - in fact in many ways it is better than smaller processes for us. You could save a lot of money by going to a coarser process such as the AMIS 0.7um (2 metal, 1 poly) at €360/sqmm or the AMIS 0.5um (3 metal, 1 poly) at €420/sqmm - both with a smaller minimum size at 8sqmm. Silicon cost would then be €2880 or €3360 compared to €7200. 8sqmm is quite a lot really.
Ultimately, you need to decide what you need. If you need analogue circuitry but don't need linear capacitors, go for the cheapest process. If you do need linear caps, you'll have to use a process with 2 poly layers. If you want digital as well, go for something finer and with more metal layers
If we're more efficient, we use less oil. OPEC will no longer have to be producing at maximum output, so they can over produce to lower the price of oil. As the price of oil goes down, everyone breathes a sigh of relief and thinks we don't need to be efficient any more.
A cynical view perhaps, but am I that far wrong? I hope your version is more likely!
Roger
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org...
on
SeaMonkey 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Yes, you're right. So everybody should use SeaMonkey then:)
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org...
on
SeaMonkey 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Isn't that what he's saying? Firefox is for grandmothers and SeaMonkey is for power users.
Re:For those of us who don't follow mozilla.org...
on
SeaMonkey 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
> Its user interface design is largely based off of Netscape Communicator 4 and is only meant > for those who are nostalgic for the days of yore.
Or else for those who think that Firefox is just a dumbed down version.
It's a Windows Explorer replacement and is very good. The amount of configuration possible is staggering - a true power users tool. I'd love to see something on this scale under *nix. If nothing else, the KDE developers should be forced to sit down and use it for a while to get ideas of how to write a better file browser.
If you use Windows and consider yourself a power user, seriously, give it a try. It'll take a bit of getting used to but there is no going back.
Have you tried Mozilla instead of FF? You might be suprised at the difference. Mozilla certainly seems to have suffered fewer problems than FF - the whole Slashdot problem from a while back. I never saw that once with Mozilla.
Points 1-3 I very rarely have a problem with. I think I've heard one person talk on a phone ever in the cinema. Still annoying...
4 I'm not sure about - I would say it was shorter, but it depends on the cinema and I've not measured it. It certainly doesn't feel like 30 minutes. I'd go for 15 minutes perhaps.
I can't argue with the other points unfortunately.
You might want to follow the NASA World Wind project. It does the same thing as Google Earth and is open source.
If I remember correctly there is a "2D" port to Linux, by which I mean you can only view directly towards the surface of the earth and can't tilt it to see land elevation.
Try going to the preferences and "Search these locations" and you will be able to add drives to your hearts content.
Did you also know that it is possible to change where the "My Documents" virtual folder refers to? I have all of my data on a seperate drive so changed it to point to there.
Right click on the "My Documents" on your desktop and choose properties and you should see the details for changing the location.
Score:6, one of the most important comments on Slashdot.
Couldn't agree more. There is nothing like the sinking feeling when you see a project uses Doxygen because it almost always means the "documentation" will be useless. Doxygen is useful in its place, but that place is only as *part* of a documentation process.
Slashdot Mirror
Almost every reply seems to think that the only chips in existence are digital. If you are thinking of a digital design then, as the others said, FPGAs are the way to go - certainly for prototyping.
If you need an analogue device or want chip scale packaging of your device, then an asic would be more appropriate. It is possible that FPGAs are available in very small packages but I'm not very up on that.
If you're in Europe, the Europractice scheme provides access to Multi-Project Wafer (MPW) runs to reduce overall fabrication costs. They also provide the software and design kits that allow you to make your designs.
My price breakdown for a 10sqmm chip in the AMS C35B4 process (0.35um, 4 metal, 2 poly, high res) with 20 devices in CSOIC28 packages:
Full Europractice membership (annual): €900
Cadence IC package single license: €1800
Cadence IC package maintenance (might not be applicable for the first year): €1150
10sqmm of AMS C35B4 silicon @ €720/sqmm: €7200
20 packages @ €52/package: €1040
Total: €10,940 or €12,090
Non of the prices include any local taxes.
They also do low volume production, but I don't know anything about the pricing.
So how to bring that down? You could save €1800/€2950 on software by using free alternatives such as on this
page. You'd have no end of problems with design rules and layout vs. schematic verification but it would be possible. Normally I'd say allocate two months of hard graft at the very least using the normal tools and with support from someone who knows what they're doing. With inadequate tools (no design rule check/layout vs. schematic) you would have to at least double it and you still might have errors.Don't be influenced by your opinions of current design processes. We use a 0.35um process all the time. It's perfectly adequate for what we want to do - in fact in many ways it is better than smaller processes for us. You could save a lot of money by going to a coarser process such as the AMIS 0.7um (2 metal, 1 poly) at €360/sqmm or the AMIS 0.5um (3 metal, 1 poly) at €420/sqmm - both with a smaller minimum size at 8sqmm. Silicon cost would then be €2880 or €3360 compared to €7200. 8sqmm is quite a lot really.
Ultimately, you need to decide what you need. If you need analogue circuitry but don't need linear capacitors, go for the cheapest process. If you do need linear caps, you'll have to use a process with 2 poly layers. If you want digital as well, go for something finer and with more metal layers
It'd probably be easier to get the US using A4 paper first.
If we're more efficient, we use less oil. OPEC will no longer have to be producing at maximum output, so they can over produce to lower the price of oil. As the price of oil goes down, everyone breathes a sigh of relief and thinks we don't need to be efficient any more.
A cynical view perhaps, but am I that far wrong? I hope your version is more likely!
Roger
Yes, you're right. So everybody should use SeaMonkey then :)
Isn't that what he's saying? Firefox is for grandmothers and SeaMonkey is for power users.
> Its user interface design is largely based off of Netscape Communicator 4 and is only meant
> for those who are nostalgic for the days of yore.
Or else for those who think that Firefox is just a dumbed down version.
imho.
Roger
It's a Windows Explorer replacement and is very good. The amount of configuration possible is staggering - a true power users tool. I'd love to see something on this scale under *nix. If nothing else, the KDE developers should be forced to sit down and use it for a while to get ideas of how to write a better file browser.
If you use Windows and consider yourself a power user, seriously, give it a try. It'll take a bit of getting used to but there is no going back.
http://gpsoft.com.au/
Roger
My D&S is I:\Users\ - this is with 2000.
p lorer\Shell Foldersp lorer\Shell Folders
Searching through the registry, these bits look relevant:
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Ex
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Ex
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\ProfileList
Lots of applications will still use the old paths though. It's best to make the change first thing when you install Windows.
Cheers,
Roger
Have you tried Mozilla instead of FF? You might be suprised at the difference. Mozilla certainly seems to have suffered fewer problems than FF - the whole Slashdot problem from a while back. I never saw that once with Mozilla.
Cheers,
Roger
So tectonic plates will win the race? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
:)
Just kidding
The article stated that although there already examples of this happening, this is the first time they hae seen a "before the split" shot.
http://geophysics.ou.edu/impacts/dinos.gif
I'm sure that's what you were referring to. Good stuff.
The reason from my point of view is that I don't really like Firefox. I still use the suite because it is better, in my opinion.
There are plenty of other people in the same position as me it seems and some of them decided to work on the suite.
Fair enough?
Roger
sshfs/ftpfs/anything you want-fs: take a look at http://lufs.sourceforge.net/lufs/
Fun stuff.
Roger
For those of you interested in what supernovae core collapse might look like, there are some simulated animations in the link below. Very pretty too.
http://www.astro.le.ac.uk/~rt53/work/index.html
Cheers,
Roger
Move to the UK! :)
Points 1-3 I very rarely have a problem with. I think I've heard one person talk on a phone ever in the cinema. Still annoying...
4 I'm not sure about - I would say it was shorter, but it depends on the cinema and I've not measured it. It certainly doesn't feel like 30 minutes. I'd go for 15 minutes perhaps.
I can't argue with the other points unfortunately.
Cheers,
Roger
> cheap launcher
Nice link, thanks.
Yes, it should have been :)
It's a common feature among older email clients at least.
/italics/ as well. I can't remember others off the top of my head.
Try
Roger
Transcriptions are under way and are stored on the wiki at http://wiki.lugradio.org/index.php/Main_Page
:)
Unfortunately it doesn't look as though episode 34 has been transcribed yet.
Listen to the audio, they are great
Windows can talk to cups as well.
You might want to follow the NASA World Wind project. It does the same thing as Google Earth and is open source.
If I remember correctly there is a "2D" port to Linux, by which I mean you can only view directly towards the surface of the earth and can't tilt it to see land elevation.
http://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/ - main site
http://www.worldwindcentral.com/ - "fan" site
http://sourceforge.net/projects/nasa-exp/ - sf site
http://ww2d.berlios.de/ - 2D port
Cheers,
Roger
Ah, fair enough. I have version 20050818.
Cheers,
Roger
Try going to the preferences and "Search these locations" and you will be able to add drives to your hearts content.
Did you also know that it is possible to change where the "My Documents" virtual folder refers to? I have all of my data on a seperate drive so changed it to point to there.
Right click on the "My Documents" on your desktop and choose properties and you should see the details for changing the location.
Cheers,
Roger
Score:6, one of the most important comments on Slashdot.
Couldn't agree more. There is nothing like the sinking feeling when you see a project uses Doxygen because it almost always means the "documentation" will be useless. Doxygen is useful in its place, but that place is only as *part* of a documentation process.
Aaarrghh!
Roger