61–70 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I blame George Lucas for this.
Star Wars confused parsecs with a unit of time, not light years.
Super excited for this! Right now I’m working on a project to build open source DNA synthesis chips (if deployed right, drops DNA synthesis cost by 100-500x market price), and efabless with their tools created with Google’s support have simply enabled the project to even be possible. I am grateful to Google for doing this.
> have simply enabled the project to even be possible Are you sure about that? The mandatory "Caravel" pad ring occupies the entire top layer of the chip as well as a ring around the edges. It hermetically entombs the design area that you control. There is no exposed surface under your control for any kind of chemically-relevant device like a microwell.
Correct me if I am wrong, this means I could do this. Perhaps I am wrong! In which case I should find a different chip supplier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> have simply enabled the project to even be possible Are you sure about that? The mandatory "Caravel" pad ring occupies the entire top layer of the chip as well as a ring around the edges. It hermetically entombs the design area that you control. There is no exposed surface under your control for any kind of chemically-relevant device like a microwell.
"Thank you for reaching out to Efabless! To answer your questions, we can support requests for bare die in our QFN shuttle programs, with the next QFN shuttle having a tapeout of November 14, 2022. Also, the material that you were asking about is aluminum." Correct me if I am wrong, this means I could do this. Perhaps I am wrong! In which case I should find a different chip supplier.
The padframe and top metal layer which "entomb" Caravel designs are both part of the die. They are not part of the package. Omitting the package does not help you here.
You might be confusing the padframe with the leadframe. The padframe is part of the die, the leadframe is part of the package. In a QFN package they are connected to each other by extremely thin gold wires.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Thank you for reaching out to Efabless! To answer your questions, we can support requests for bare die in our QFN shuttle programs, with the next QFN shuttle having a tapeout of November 14, 2022. Also, the material that you were asking about is aluminum." Correct me if I am wrong, this means I could do this. Perhaps I am wrong! In which case I should find a different chip supplier.
Unfortunately you are wrong. The padframe and top metal layer which "entomb" Caravel designs are both part of the die. They are not part of the package. Omitting the package does not help you here. You might be confusing the padframe with the leadframe . The padframe is part of the die, the leadframe is part of the package. In a QFN package they are connected to each other by extremely thin gold wires.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
once a process is no longer bleeding edge, what's the benefit of keeping manufacturing details secret? at this stage, presumably no one would risk the capital and time required to copy the foundry while publishing details increases the likelihood of attracting more clients. thanks in advance for the clarification on why the industry operates the way it does.
> once a process is no longer bleeding edge, what's the benefit of keeping manufacturing details secret? Even if it's not bleeding edge, there still might be special features or secrets they want to protect. For really old nodes, I think it boils down to two reasons: 1) Clients with money don't care about open design rules, so there was basically no demand for it. 2) Foundries generally have a pretty strong culture o…
assuming no one will invest the time and capital to build a similar foundry, is it fair to say that such secrecy has minimal benefits? or can an existing foundry learn these secrets and improve their own products pretty easily?
I might get some hate for this, but Google seems to be doing some really cool things, like in fintech as well as this silicon project. Google Finance is one of the only players I've seen with an interest of opening things up when so much of the industry is about pushing others out and restricting access. Like for example the CME deal, to open source live, low latency stock market data. Bloomberg might let you rent it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an off-topic complaint. Just because someone posts a link about Google (or substitute any other company) doesn't mean it's okay to post whatever complaints about Google you want. Particularly when they're the same sort of repetitive complaints people post every time. We've heard it, give it a rest.
Is it a random complaint though? How is it any different from everyone regularly warning against investing in google services because they are shut down so often? Seems pretty relevant for anyone who is considering investing in this project but isn't aware of Google's behavior with other large open source projects, e.g. Android. Imagine if people told naysayers to shut up when Microsoft was trying to destroy Linux wi…
Better to share links to interesting and relevant content. News about what was happening with the SCO lawsuit was interesting back in the day. Low-effort complaints about it were not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> once a process is no longer bleeding edge, what's the benefit of keeping manufacturing details secret? Even if it's not bleeding edge, there still might be special features or secrets they want to protect. For really old nodes, I think it boils down to two reasons: 1) Clients with money don't care about open design rules, so there was basically no demand for it. 2) Foundries generally have a pretty strong culture o…
thanks for the clarification. assuming no one will invest the time and capital to build a similar foundry, is it fair to say that such secrecy has minimal benefits? or can an existing foundry learn these secrets and improve their own products pretty easily?
I guess let me put it this way - I think it's entirely rational for them to be cautious. There's currently not a lot of upside to being more open, so it's usually not worth it even if the risk is small. Programs like this are great because they hit both sides of the equation: increasing demand for open PDKs while lowing the perceived risk by building a track record of successful releases.
I might get some hate for this, but Google seems to be doing some really cool things, like in fintech as well as this silicon project. Google Finance is one of the only players I've seen with an interest of opening things up when so much of the industry is about pushing others out and restricting access. Like for example the CME deal, to open source live, low latency stock market data. Bloomberg might let you rent it…
It's "free" until it's sunset with no notice. Google is notorious for doing this. RIP Reader.