I second that. I only managed to sit through the first part of the show on youtube. I would have expected to see comments more negative comments on slashdot. But then - you can never underestimate the slashdot crowd.
BS - all your examples are passive OLED displays or driven by a silicon transistor backplane. I am talking about using organic transistors for a backplane.
Yes, there are various OLED displays out there. But they all use backplanes based on silicon transistors. The display by polymer vision does supposedly use a backplane based on organic transistors. That is a huge difference.
It is somewhat ironic, that organic transistors are not even remotely mature enough to drive an OLED front plane. So you can either have an organic front plane or an organic back plane.
It's Phillips branded and integrated but the tech that makes it work is E-Ink Corp's.
That is not true. Each display has a frontplane (the display mechanism) and a backplane (the transistors that control it).
As far as I understand it, only the front plane is by e-Ink. The back plane was apparently entirely developed by polymer vision.
An interesting fact is, that it is based on organic electronics. (check out the tech section). If they manage to bring this display to market, it will probably be the first commercial application of organic electronic.
few months ago Philips promised a rollable, paper-like display in two years, but it only took them a few months..
The new thing is the reader. Functional prototypes of the displays have been presented way earlier, as obvious from many older articles on slashdot. The displays have been under development for at least five years. Check out the publications from the polymervision website:
H. E. A. Huitema, G. H. Gelinck, J. B. P. H. van der Putten, K. E. Kuijk, C. M. Hart, E. Cantatore, P. T. Herwig, A. J. J. M. van Breemen, D. M. de Leeuw, Plastic transistors in active-matrix displays, Nature 2001, 414, 599.
G. H. Gelinck, T. C. T. Geuns, D. M. de Leeuw,High-performance all-polymer integrated circuits, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2000, 77, 1487-1489.
C. J. Drury, C. M. J. Mutsaerts, C. M. Hart, M. Matters, D. M. de Leeuw, Low-cost all-polymer integrated circuits., Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 73, 108-110.
The fact is, it's *the biggest machine in the world*, bar none. There's almost 30 miles of completely automated track, more motors and linear accelerators than you can shake a stick at. A machine that big is going to require lots of time to shake out, and that happened about 5 years ago..
How about the Frankfurt Airport? It has probably more passengers than Denver and had a functional baggage transport system for years (decades).
In fact almost all bigger german airport have automated baggage transport. And I have never experienced trouble. The baggage is always unloaded far quicker than I ever experienced in any US airport. (Try Washington Airport for example.. its a mess!)
If they know how to attach a nanotube to a layer of silicon to make a transistor, don't you think they'l know how to attach a branched nanotube to make a full circuit?
There is no known way to build large numbers of nanontube transistors with good yield. What can be done so far is attaching single nanotubes somewhere and measure lots of devices until you find a good one.
Remember: To build a state of the art CPU you have to produce more than 1e8 transistors with exactly 100% yield.
I think you will be stunned once you RTFA and the attached comments, because the owner of the set is actually a girl. And its her and her boyfriend assembling it.
This is definitly NOT research. It is development - and that only a very low level. The GFX chip manufacturers usually ship their chips with a reference board design. Most gfx card manufacturers just take this reference design and tweak it a little - often just to accomodate a better fan or something like that. The cheaper brands just reproduce the reference design. That is why all the nonbrand cards are alike.
I honstely doubt that ASUS does anything that could be dubbed as "research", especially not in the graphics card section. Testing different variations of the reference design and altering fans is hardly even development.
Growth front analysis based on fractal theory is a pretty common method. It can also be used to describe advancing flames, the growth of thin films, growths of plants and bacteria colonies etc.
Its application in medical sciences may be rare - mostly because med. people are not really fond of mathematics.
Given the background of these methods I would be suprised if this was the first time it is applied to the growth of cancer. The article seems to be well written and pretty comprehensive though, thus it is probably worth mentioning anways.
If anybody is interested in further reading on this topic: The second reference in the articles (barabasy et al) points to the bible of fractal surface growth. This is all you need to start.
I have no idea about this, but I presume that the aim of meeting to code is meant to improve cooperation, right? Is this a pure "Extreme programming" session, or will there be some planning? Otherwhise it sounds like fun.
Water cooling doesn't mean the xbox360 is faster. It could be designed crappy, with bad airflow.
Well, we can assume that both boxes are based on the same technology and both use the technology in a similarily efficient way. In that case, the amount of generated heat is proportional to the avialable processing power. This means that if the XBOX360 generated more heat, it has more power. As simple as that.
Hell, if the revolution is that small, it wouldnt need water cooling
Small = less space for convection, less space for conventional heat removal. Means that a more efficient method of heat removal is required to removed that same amount of heat.
Dresden was one of the centers of GDR microelectronics. The GDR was the technolocial leader in microelectronics of the entire east block and the gourvernment poured billions into it. However, COCOM succeeded in keeping them technologically way behing the western countries. Nevertheless, Dresden was the birthplace of Honeckers infamous 1 mbit (scroll down) chip.
After the reunificiation there was a huge skilled workforce in microelectronics readily available in Dresden. This was, and is, aside from gouvernment incentives a major reason to build fabs there. Siemens (and now Infineon) were the first to take advantage of this. AMD came later.
The fabs have been extremely successful so far. Infineons fab was the first to have mass production on 300mm wafers world wide. AMDs fab managed to ramp the copper/low-k metallization process in record time.
Btw. some of the GDR semiconductor companies still live on in form of ZMD (Dresden), X-FAB (in Erfurt) and the IHP (Frankfurt/Oder). However they mostly specialize in niche products now.
From the Article: Check out the pictures of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open.
You wish. There is no photo showing the actual production at an AMD site. One photo shows some support level, another photo does actually show the production of an entirely different company.
from the articles: Without a doubt, motherboards are the most complex and essential part of the modern PC.
I dont know, I think the manufacturing process of the CPU and memory is slightly more complex. The entire process from wafer arrival to package shipments takes 2 to 3 month.
Indeed - and somehow I also think that this is where their motivation comes from, instead of real science.
This structure could not be less ideal for microsystem/nanosystem technology. You'd mainly want devices constructed from planar layer to be able to manufacture anything.
And somebody should really make up his mind about sizescaling. Any gravity based approach will inherently get more ineffecient when you scale such a device down. This can easily be shown by deriving characteristic scaling numbers. The mass reduces with l while the mass displacement scales down linearly. In addition other factors like stiction forces becomes relatively larger and have to be taken into account.
Due to this the ability to make efficient use of gravity diminishes when the size of the device is reduced. This is practally demonstrated by nature. Smaller animals (insects) are not influences by gravity and can easily climb up steep slopes.
Yes, especially since this totally irrelevant to the solar cell referred to in the article.
As the article clearly states it just uses titanium as a base, not as al electrically active compound. The solar cell is actually a fairly well known Copper-Indium-(Germanium)-Selenide (CIGS) cell. Nothing special about it and in fact there are other companies which are doing this far longer and probably better.
However, there are ways to utilize Titanium (TiO2) in solar cells - in organic dye cells also known as "Graetzel Cells". The Wikipedia article does even tell you how to build one byself. Check out the links.
Slashdot Mirror
I second that. I only managed to sit through the first part of the show on youtube. I would have expected to see comments more negative comments on slashdot. But then - you can never underestimate the slashdot crowd.
The granddaddy of all consoles does actually have one of the largest active homebrewing scenes.
Just a random selection of links:
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/user/print/a/4849
http://www.atariage.com/2600/programming/
http://www.alienbill.com/2600/
BS. There are lots of examples,
BS - all your examples are passive OLED displays or driven by a silicon transistor backplane. I am talking about using organic transistors for a backplane.
Yes, there are various OLED displays out there. But they all use backplanes based on silicon transistors. The display by polymer vision does supposedly use a backplane based on organic transistors. That is a huge difference.
It is somewhat ironic, that organic transistors are not even remotely mature enough to drive an OLED front plane. So you can either have an organic front plane or an organic back plane.
It's Phillips branded and integrated but the tech that makes it work is E-Ink Corp's.
That is not true. Each display has a frontplane (the display mechanism) and a backplane (the transistors that control it).
As far as I understand it, only the front plane is by e-Ink. The back plane was apparently entirely developed by polymer vision.
An interesting fact is, that it is based on organic electronics. (check out the tech section). If they manage to bring this display to market, it will probably be the first commercial application of organic electronic.
few months ago Philips promised a rollable, paper-like display in two years, but it only took them a few months..
The new thing is the reader. Functional prototypes of the displays have been presented way earlier, as obvious from many older articles on slashdot. The displays have been under development for at least five years. Check out the publications from the polymervision website:
H. E. A. Huitema, G. H. Gelinck, J. B. P. H. van der Putten, K. E. Kuijk, C. M. Hart, E. Cantatore, P. T. Herwig, A. J. J. M. van Breemen, D. M. de Leeuw, Plastic transistors in active-matrix displays, Nature 2001, 414, 599.
G. H. Gelinck, T. C. T. Geuns, D. M. de Leeuw,High-performance all-polymer integrated circuits, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2000, 77, 1487-1489.
C. J. Drury, C. M. J. Mutsaerts, C. M. Hart, M. Matters, D. M. de Leeuw, Low-cost all-polymer integrated circuits., Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 73, 108-110.
The fact is, it's *the biggest machine in the world*, bar none. There's almost 30 miles of completely automated track, more motors and linear accelerators than you can shake a stick at. A machine that big is going to require lots of time to shake out, and that happened about 5 years ago..
.. its a mess!)
How about the Frankfurt Airport? It has probably more passengers than Denver and had a functional baggage transport system for years (decades).
In fact almost all bigger german airport have automated baggage transport. And I have never experienced trouble. The baggage is always unloaded far quicker than I ever experienced in any US airport. (Try Washington Airport for example
Google search for Robert Moog
If they know how to attach a nanotube to a layer of silicon to make a transistor, don't you think they'l know how to attach a branched nanotube to make a full circuit?
There is no known way to build large numbers of nanontube transistors with good yield. What can be done so far is attaching single nanotubes somewhere and measure lots of devices until you find a good one.
Remember: To build a state of the art CPU you have to produce more than 1e8 transistors with exactly 100% yield.
I think you will be stunned once you RTFA and the attached comments, because the owner of the set is actually a girl. And its her and her boyfriend assembling it.
Lame trolling attempt otherwhise...
I believe it was called a thin-film integrated circuit,
Uh, no. Thin film circuits are an entirely different thing.
Er.. I'd suggest you reread your "electronics 101" book.
35A at 12V will just draw ~4A from the wall plug (depending on conversion efficiency) and won't be a problem at all.
This is definitly NOT research. It is development - and that only a very low level. The GFX chip manufacturers usually ship their chips with a reference board design. Most gfx card manufacturers just take this reference design and tweak it a little - often just to accomodate a better fan or something like that. The cheaper brands just reproduce the reference design. That is why all the nonbrand cards are alike.
I honstely doubt that ASUS does anything that could be dubbed as "research", especially not in the graphics card section. Testing different variations of the reference design and altering fans is hardly even development.
Growth front analysis based on fractal theory is a pretty common method. It can also be used to describe advancing flames, the growth of thin films, growths of plants and bacteria colonies etc.
Its application in medical sciences may be rare - mostly because med. people are not really fond of mathematics.
Given the background of these methods I would be suprised if this was the first time it is applied to the growth of cancer. The article seems to be well written and pretty comprehensive though, thus it is probably worth mentioning anways.
If anybody is interested in further reading on this topic: The second reference in the articles (barabasy et al) points to the bible of fractal surface growth. This is all you need to start.
How comes copying GUIs, look and feel and functionality of software is seen as a normal thing while people go mad about copied Ipods etc?
I have no idea about this, but I presume that the aim of meeting to code is meant to improve cooperation, right? Is this a pure "Extreme programming" session, or will there be some planning? Otherwhise it sounds like fun.
Water cooling doesn't mean the xbox360 is faster. It could be designed crappy, with bad airflow.
Well, we can assume that both boxes are based on the same technology and both use the technology in a similarily efficient way. In that case, the amount of generated heat is proportional to the avialable processing power. This means that if the XBOX360 generated more heat, it has more power. As simple as that.
Hell, if the revolution is that small, it wouldnt need water cooling
Small = less space for convection, less space for conventional heat removal. Means that a more efficient method of heat removal is required to removed that same amount of heat.
I doubt it will be technically more impressive than than XBOX 360 or the PSX 3. The absence of water cooling (small case!) says it all.
There is a difference between "a commercial aircraft" and "an aircraft being used commercially".
Originally designed to carry the Buran shuttle and its captive-carry mounting crane
I think that means that it is not commercial.
What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?
Dresden was one of the centers of GDR microelectronics. The GDR was the technolocial leader in microelectronics of the entire east block and the gourvernment poured billions into it. However, COCOM succeeded in keeping them technologically way behing the western countries. Nevertheless, Dresden was the birthplace of Honeckers infamous 1 mbit (scroll down) chip.
After the reunificiation there was a huge skilled workforce in microelectronics readily available in Dresden. This was, and is, aside from gouvernment incentives a major reason to build fabs there. Siemens (and now Infineon) were the first to take advantage of this. AMD came later.
The fabs have been extremely successful so far. Infineons fab was the first to have mass production on 300mm wafers world wide. AMDs fab managed to ramp the copper/low-k metallization process in record time.
Btw. some of the GDR semiconductor companies still live on in form of ZMD (Dresden), X-FAB (in Erfurt) and the IHP (Frankfurt/Oder). However they mostly specialize in niche products now.
From the Article:
Check out the pictures of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open.
You wish. There is no photo showing the actual production at an AMD site. One photo shows some support level, another photo does actually show the production of an entirely different company.
from the articles: Without a doubt, motherboards are the most complex and essential part of the modern PC.
I dont know, I think the manufacturing process of the CPU and memory is slightly more complex. The entire process from wafer arrival to package shipments takes 2 to 3 month.
Indeed - and somehow I also think that this is where their motivation comes from, instead of real science.
This structure could not be less ideal for microsystem/nanosystem technology. You'd mainly want devices constructed from planar layer to be able to manufacture anything.
And somebody should really make up his mind about sizescaling. Any gravity based approach will inherently get more ineffecient when you scale such a device down. This can easily be shown by deriving characteristic scaling numbers. The mass reduces with l while the mass displacement scales down linearly. In addition other factors like stiction forces becomes relatively larger and have to be taken into account.
Due to this the ability to make efficient use of gravity diminishes when the size of the device is reduced. This is practally demonstrated by nature. Smaller animals (insects) are not influences by gravity and can easily climb up steep slopes.
Yes, especially since this totally irrelevant to the solar cell referred to in the article.
As the article clearly states it just uses titanium as a base, not as al electrically active compound. The solar cell is actually a fairly well known Copper-Indium-(Germanium)-Selenide (CIGS) cell. Nothing special about it and in fact there are other companies which are doing this far longer and probably better.
However, there are ways to utilize Titanium (TiO2) in solar cells - in organic dye cells also known as "Graetzel Cells". The Wikipedia article does even tell you how to build one byself. Check out the links.