InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

RuudSaltis

06/09/24 4:31 PM

#193951 RE: tedpeele #193950

The more you feed the monster the louder it screams.!
icon url

prototype_101

06/09/24 4:41 PM

#193952 RE: tedpeele #193950

teddybear using lies and deceptions here again, it's nothing new, everyone knows his game, he will twist and contort EVERYTHING that Lebby or any Long says to be negative, this is the kind of person that would swindle his own grandmother!! here's the TRUTH just as Lightning_Rod explained to teddybear a DOZEN TIMES already just today!!!!! But teddybear ALWAYS comes back and TWISTS & CONTORTS EVERYTHING and puts his ultra-negative spin on it!!!! PERIOD!!!! He's a LIAR/DECEIVER plain & simple!!!!!

Gemini(Bard), is there such a thing as a "completed" PDK?

In the context of integrated circuit (IC) design, a Process Design Kit (PDK) is never truly "completed." Here's why:

Constant Improvement: The semiconductor industry is constantly evolving, with new materials, processes, and design rules being developed. A PDK needs to reflect these advancements to ensure designers have access to the latest capabilities of the manufacturing process.

Foundry Specificity: PDKs are specific to a particular foundry and their manufacturing process. As a foundry refines its processes, the PDK needs to be updated to reflect those changes.

Error Correction: Even the most rigorous testing can't guarantee a PDK is entirely free of errors. As issues arise, the PDK needs to be patched and updated to ensure accurate and reliable design.

However, a PDK can be considered functional or production-ready when it meets these criteria:

Comprehensiveness: It provides all the necessary information for designers to create functional and manufacturable ICs using the specific foundry's process.

Stability: It has undergone thorough testing and validation to ensure reliable results.

Documentation: It includes clear and up-to-date documentation for designers to understand the available options and design constraints.


So, while a PDK is never truly "completed," it can be considered functional and ready for use when it fulfills these requirements.



BOOM!!! Lying scumbag Shorts do what lying scumbag Shorts do, they LIE!!!

At OFC Lebby showcased 200gbs modulators being mass produced on 200mm Wafers with

1 Perfect Attributes
2 Poling of 1000s devices in a split second in the Foundry PDK process!!!!

Lying scumbag Shorts have posted here 1000s of times this was IMPOSSIBLE!!

AND, on the lab tour 100+ people gave witness to "a constant flow of Wafers" coming from all around the world!!!

PDKs are working perfectly at FOUNDRIES ON 3 CONTINENTS!!!!!

Lebby: We’re not behind. As investors you may look at this and go, well, it’s taking a long time to get to revenue. But are we really behind the curve? I don’t think we are. That’s why I’m excited. I don’t feel that we’re behind. I feel we’re on a threshold of something huge.

LWLG 200gbs Polymer Modulator now being produced at multiple Foundries on 3 Continents including on large 200mm Wafers which support Mass Commercial applications in the Millions of Units, the Timeline has NOT changed, Lebby has LWLG positioned for Customer Acceptance in 2024 with Sampling, and Ramp into 2025, with full blown Mass Commercialization in 2026, remember this matches PERFECTLY with the following

a) Lebby's Long-standing Timeline to Commercialization with Customer Acceptance in 2024 including Sampling Units shown on Lebby SAM SOM guidance given at 2023 ASM

b) The LightCounting Forecast for 800gb/1600Gbs Adoption curve rapidly accelerating from Introduction in 2024

c) Andy Bechtolscheim, founder and chairman of Arista at OFC showing a slide of Polymers HVP (High Volume Production) being in 2026

The ONLY thing that has changed is the level of interest from the giant Tier 1's has SKYROCKETED so much so based on the 2024 OFC demos that Lebby has been forced to pick & choose between the couple dozen Tier 1's clamoring for Lebby's time & attention, Lebby is giving first priority to those Tier 1's that will get LWLG's technology to Ubiquity the fastest!!

Lastly, LR I will give you credit you did get this part right though when you said of teddybear, You are such a doofus. Exactly!!
Bullish
Bullish
icon url

KCCO7913

06/09/24 4:46 PM

#193953 RE: tedpeele #193950

And yet you couldn’t answer what would make it “sufficient”.

A PDK is complete to create LWLG modulators.

Is it “the” PDK that will be involved with a technology transfer to a foundry whereby foundry customers can build PICs with the LWLG component? Who knows.
icon url

Aimless Blade

06/09/24 5:38 PM

#193958 RE: tedpeele #193950

Using logic, wouldn’t we assume many PDK have been completed (that’s how you make a wafer), then tweaked and re-done (more wafers from multiple foundries) then tweaked again per new developments, then tweaked again when working with specific foundries/collaborators/customers….?

I don’t get your theory that there is to be one master PDK to rule them all.
icon url

Lightning_Rod

06/09/24 6:30 PM

#193965 RE: tedpeele #193950

TP:

I called you out and you can’t provide one example anywhere on the internet of a completed PDK for a photonic modulator.

It should be easy TP. A simple Google search will do the trick or will it?

L_R
icon url

Lightning_Rod

06/09/24 6:59 PM

#193968 RE: tedpeele #193950

TP:
I gave you a very simple task. Find an example on the internet of a “completed” PDK. I asked you to prove that there is such a thing as a final “completed” PDK.

Here is a major clue. Have you ever heard of open source software? How about it’s equivalent in open source PDK’s?

If you understood what an open source PDK was you would never have suggested that there has to be a “completed” PDK that could be utilized universally across the industry for mass production of modulators.

You are a complete open source d**fus!

L_R