Sure, carving things out with ions is great. We do the same kind of thing here with our FEI FIB (Fixed Ion Beam). The problem inherent is that it take *a long time*. This is not a speedy process. It's much akin to e-beam lithography, where you use a computer controlled beam of electrons to write a pattern in an energy sensitive photoresist. Again, it takes *a long time*. It can take up to 9 hours to write a repeating pattern on a 6 inch round wafer. Carving things out with an ion beam takes considerably longer. We use our FIB to carve out cross sections of a feature to attain various CD measurements or to simply look at how something plated or dep'd. It can take up to 3 hours to make a.5um x.5um x.05um cut. To pattern a whole wafer would take days.
The other problem that lies with ion beam applications is that they're even more prone to charging the wafer's surface. It's kind of like static electricity (see next paragraph), with all these ions smacking into the surface and knocking atoms away. Electrons get transferred. If the surface of the wafer is non-conductive, say... silicon dioxide, it's going to charge, and your beam is going to drift. This would be a very bad thing for ~50nm line widths. It's a very bad thing in general. Think of it as trying to spray paint something you don't have masked off in a very strong breeze. It's not going to be pretty. Like my co-workers in plating and cmp like to point out, in lithography, if we screw up, we can just strip off the resist and do it again. If you're carving out patterns with ions, you can't very well put it back.
Just a quick thing on static electricy, it's not something you want when you're trying to build semiconductors. ESD can do some pretty amazing things when you're looking on a micron or sub-micron scale. I've seen the after effects of ESD, where it melted through layers of Aluminum Oxide, Copper, and Nickle Iron. If you're building tiny transistors, ESD is something you most definitely want to stay away from. One trick we use is to dep a thin layer of gold over the wafer to distribute whatever charge builds up, but then you've got gold all over your wafer, how do you take it off? RIE or CMP it away? Sure, you could, but it's messy and time consuming.
Getting off my soapbox, ion beam "lithography" isn't in the least bit practical, and I wouldn't look for it to replace the "traditional" methods of photo and e-beam.
ah, another article i'm somewhat qualified to comment on. currently i work for Seagate Technologies, in their R&D division. we're working on *really tiny things*. i can't really give any specs and whatnot, company policy and all that. wouldn't want ibm or maxtor catching wind of what's going on here. or read-rite for that matter, but they're a joke.
anyway, mems, truely interesting little structures. crude mems have been around for quite some time in the manner of waveguides, for fibre optic applications. about them being limited by the size of the light? well, light can get pretty darn small. the little red laser in your average cd player runs a nominal 650nm wavelength. i say nominal because "red" in the visual spectrum has a relatively large range of wavelengths. i'm trying to recall some of the interesting facts i picked up while interviewing for a position in lucent's opto-e department. if i recall correctly, in the "red" spectrum they're able to accurately create (via laser diode) and receive (phototransistors) something like 192 different individual wavelengths. tremendously useful thing, when you think about it. that means they can send 192 different signals across one fibre. i've gone off on a tangent, haven't i?
back on subject, there's a whole huge range of *light* in the electromagnetic spectrum. here at work we're using ultraviolet light in our photolithography processes (as well as e-beam, we're high tech, remember?). currently we're using what's called G-Line, or 436nm. it's not really true G-line, it's really somewhere around 420nm, but we're using the mutt of ultratech's litter, the 2700. (illegal segue: if anyone's got a 4700, 6700, or a nikon;) for sale cheap or good advice on a way of deep sixing a 2700 and making it look like an accident, please let me know) thus far, the useable spectrum goes down to 157nm, or ultradeep uv. we're looking at picking up something capable of 193, or deep uv, just to cut down on e-beam time (writing patterns with electrons takes a *very* long time).
whether or not this end of the spectrum is feasable for communications transmission, i don't know. i won't imagine it would be, because thus far, laser diodes in that range haven't been made, and if they can be made, they won't be cheap. part of the reason dvd players are so expensive is because the laser diodes aren't cheap or easy to produce. they're getting there though.
where was i... oh, mems. i wouldn't look for mems to make any great leaps and bounds yet. it's still barely in it's infantcy, maybe even still a fetus. that's the wonderfully annoying thing about the cutting edge of technology, we have no idea where we can go until we've already been there. it's total hell on those 3 year corperate plans. we (worldwide humanity generalization) have the capability to produce fantastically small things and build them up to mems, but we don't yet have an understanding of what we want to do with them, how we want to do it, and how to make it cheap enough that it'll find a niche. ibm's building quantum computers, but i wouldn't look for one on your desktop in the next 20 or so years. mems still has a long way to go. enough of a technology lesson for the day.
as of yet, no, but there are companies working on an mpeg-4 decoder on silicon (hardware). your best bet for porting those dvd rips right now is to get a dvd player that can read cdrs and vcds or svcds and convert your divx to mpeg-2 format. a warning though, converting them takes up a lot of processor time and power. there's more information on what you need and how to do it out at http://www.digital-digest.com/divx/
on a more personally oppinionated level, just buy the dvd. i know they're expensive, but often times they're well worth it for the extra options, like that nice dolby 5.1 soundtrack. i used to trade divx (i know, bad me.), and unless you rip it yourself, or get someone you know to rip it, chances are, you're not going to get the full audio track. most dvd rippers just rip the stereo track, because it's easier, faster, and smaller. in the beginning, one of the biggest attractions of divx (aside from the fact that it was free) was that a full movie in near dvd quality would fit on a single 650 or 700 meg cd. to keep the size within that 650 meg region, you had to make sacrifices. quality, screen size, and audio got cut. i'm somewhat of an audiophile. i don't get into the whole vinyl v. cd thing, but i do appreciate quality in my sound. my belief is, if you're gonna truely enjoy a movie, it's gotta be more than just a visual experience. if ya wanna do it right, spring for a good sound system. certain Kenwood systems (VR-407) are nicely stacked, but don't carry the pricetag of comparably equipped sony, aiwa, etc. systems. i find the kenwood's also got wonderful sound clarity and a lot of power.
as for the dvd player itself, find a deal. look for the aspects that you want, but don't pay for all the garbage you'll never use. if you've got a cd changer already, do you really need a dvd changer? is there really a necessity to have the ability to watch 5 dvds in a row without getting up to walk across the room and take 30 seconds to change the disc? the qualities i'd look for in a player would be the ability to play cdrs, vcds, and svcds, sound capability (dts, dolby 5.1) with an s/pdif rca or optical digital output (let's face it, analog output just doesn't cut it), and compatible video output (if your tv doesn't support s-video, it's time to get a new tv.). that's really about all you need. i bought my Apex AD500B for 100 bucks, and it's good enough for me. it does have a tendancy to skip every now and then, and is very sensitive to dirt and finger prints on the discs, so i'm thinkin about shoving it off on my parents under the guise of an xmas gift and buying myself a better model.
that said, i think i've been sufficiently verbose to bore most of you to death. bottom line, no divx compatable dvd players yet, and research your options thoroughly instead of buying on impulse. also, where and whatever you do decide to buy, i recommend also paying the extra cash for whatever extended warranty is available, because stuff happens, and as my friend murphy would dictate, it usually happens just after the warranty runs out.
Slashdot Mirror
The other problem that lies with ion beam applications is that they're even more prone to charging the wafer's surface. It's kind of like static electricity (see next paragraph), with all these ions smacking into the surface and knocking atoms away. Electrons get transferred. If the surface of the wafer is non-conductive, say... silicon dioxide, it's going to charge, and your beam is going to drift. This would be a very bad thing for ~50nm line widths. It's a very bad thing in general. Think of it as trying to spray paint something you don't have masked off in a very strong breeze. It's not going to be pretty. Like my co-workers in plating and cmp like to point out, in lithography, if we screw up, we can just strip off the resist and do it again. If you're carving out patterns with ions, you can't very well put it back.
Just a quick thing on static electricy, it's not something you want when you're trying to build semiconductors. ESD can do some pretty amazing things when you're looking on a micron or sub-micron scale. I've seen the after effects of ESD, where it melted through layers of Aluminum Oxide, Copper, and Nickle Iron. If you're building tiny transistors, ESD is something you most definitely want to stay away from. One trick we use is to dep a thin layer of gold over the wafer to distribute whatever charge builds up, but then you've got gold all over your wafer, how do you take it off? RIE or CMP it away? Sure, you could, but it's messy and time consuming.
Getting off my soapbox, ion beam "lithography" isn't in the least bit practical, and I wouldn't look for it to replace the "traditional" methods of photo and e-beam.
anyway, mems, truely interesting little structures. crude mems have been around for quite some time in the manner of waveguides, for fibre optic applications. about them being limited by the size of the light? well, light can get pretty darn small. the little red laser in your average cd player runs a nominal 650nm wavelength. i say nominal because "red" in the visual spectrum has a relatively large range of wavelengths. i'm trying to recall some of the interesting facts i picked up while interviewing for a position in lucent's opto-e department. if i recall correctly, in the "red" spectrum they're able to accurately create (via laser diode) and receive (phototransistors) something like 192 different individual wavelengths. tremendously useful thing, when you think about it. that means they can send 192 different signals across one fibre. i've gone off on a tangent, haven't i?
back on subject, there's a whole huge range of *light* in the electromagnetic spectrum. here at work we're using ultraviolet light in our photolithography processes (as well as e-beam, we're high tech, remember?). currently we're using what's called G-Line, or 436nm. it's not really true G-line, it's really somewhere around 420nm, but we're using the mutt of ultratech's litter, the 2700. (illegal segue: if anyone's got a 4700, 6700, or a nikon ;) for sale cheap or good advice on a way of deep sixing a 2700 and making it look like an accident, please let me know) thus far, the useable spectrum goes down to 157nm, or ultradeep uv. we're looking at picking up something capable of 193, or deep uv, just to cut down on e-beam time (writing patterns with electrons takes a *very* long time).
whether or not this end of the spectrum is feasable for communications transmission, i don't know. i won't imagine it would be, because thus far, laser diodes in that range haven't been made, and if they can be made, they won't be cheap. part of the reason dvd players are so expensive is because the laser diodes aren't cheap or easy to produce. they're getting there though.
where was i... oh, mems. i wouldn't look for mems to make any great leaps and bounds yet. it's still barely in it's infantcy, maybe even still a fetus. that's the wonderfully annoying thing about the cutting edge of technology, we have no idea where we can go until we've already been there. it's total hell on those 3 year corperate plans. we (worldwide humanity generalization) have the capability to produce fantastically small things and build them up to mems, but we don't yet have an understanding of what we want to do with them, how we want to do it, and how to make it cheap enough that it'll find a niche. ibm's building quantum computers, but i wouldn't look for one on your desktop in the next 20 or so years. mems still has a long way to go. enough of a technology lesson for the day.
Tom's has the coolest graphs.
here's the link for the article about Toshiba's divx decoder on silicon: http://www.electronicnews.com/news/5694-346NewsDet ail.asp
on a more personally oppinionated level, just buy the dvd. i know they're expensive, but often times they're well worth it for the extra options, like that nice dolby 5.1 soundtrack. i used to trade divx (i know, bad me.), and unless you rip it yourself, or get someone you know to rip it, chances are, you're not going to get the full audio track. most dvd rippers just rip the stereo track, because it's easier, faster, and smaller. in the beginning, one of the biggest attractions of divx (aside from the fact that it was free) was that a full movie in near dvd quality would fit on a single 650 or 700 meg cd. to keep the size within that 650 meg region, you had to make sacrifices. quality, screen size, and audio got cut. i'm somewhat of an audiophile. i don't get into the whole vinyl v. cd thing, but i do appreciate quality in my sound. my belief is, if you're gonna truely enjoy a movie, it's gotta be more than just a visual experience. if ya wanna do it right, spring for a good sound system. certain Kenwood systems (VR-407) are nicely stacked, but don't carry the pricetag of comparably equipped sony, aiwa, etc. systems. i find the kenwood's also got wonderful sound clarity and a lot of power.
as for the dvd player itself, find a deal. look for the aspects that you want, but don't pay for all the garbage you'll never use. if you've got a cd changer already, do you really need a dvd changer? is there really a necessity to have the ability to watch 5 dvds in a row without getting up to walk across the room and take 30 seconds to change the disc? the qualities i'd look for in a player would be the ability to play cdrs, vcds, and svcds, sound capability (dts, dolby 5.1) with an s/pdif rca or optical digital output (let's face it, analog output just doesn't cut it), and compatible video output (if your tv doesn't support s-video, it's time to get a new tv.). that's really about all you need. i bought my Apex AD500B for 100 bucks, and it's good enough for me. it does have a tendancy to skip every now and then, and is very sensitive to dirt and finger prints on the discs, so i'm thinkin about shoving it off on my parents under the guise of an xmas gift and buying myself a better model.
that said, i think i've been sufficiently verbose to bore most of you to death. bottom line, no divx compatable dvd players yet, and research your options thoroughly instead of buying on impulse. also, where and whatever you do decide to buy, i recommend also paying the extra cash for whatever extended warranty is available, because stuff happens, and as my friend murphy would dictate, it usually happens just after the warranty runs out.