Vein, I think more importantly, Dr Lebby is giving resounding confirmations that the 50Gbs prototype is/will be very soon optimized and available for customer evaluations, and if Dr Lebby knows that the 50Gbs device can be optimized then the 100Gbs and other future devices can be as well, and as Inversor just pointed out, and also Dr Lebby addressed in the ASM Q&A as well,
Lebby will only provide samples to companies that agree to a rather short response time. About a month or less.
So LWLG is getting very close to the prize now, if you read the White Paper it spells out WHY the Industry will choose the LWLG Platform,
Recall that two different solutions for 400G are shown in Figure 2. One reason that multiple solutions exist is discomfort with the use of 8 lanes. Parallelism beyond 4 lanes has not proved economical or small enough previously. But the industry is even more leery of increasing the modulation complexity. Complex modulation schemes are more sensitive to noise and are more error-prone. Notice that in Figure 3 the difference in PAM4 levels is only 1/3 has much as for NRZ. As a result, the optoelectronics on both transmit and receive ends must distinguish between these smaller differences in signal level. They require power-hungry signal processing electronics not only to encode and decode the data but to offset these errors. The industry already has experience with very complex modulations schemes (e.g. the gray and black circles in Figure 1) and deems them too large, too power-hungry, and way too expensive—in other words, practical only for national backbone networks. Moreover, they are approaching fundamental limits.
Does anyone here seriously think Dr Lebby would publish this White Paper if there were even the slightest chance that the LWLG technology would not be completely optimized and highly desirable to the customers/partners in the very near future?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
