Searching \ for '[OT] Germanium transistors' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=germanium+transistors
Search entire site for: 'Germanium transistors'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Germanium transistors'
1999\10\30@221211 by Robert A. LaBudde

flavicon
face
<x-flowed>In case anyone is still looking for germanium transistors, there's a lot of
100 for sale on eBay for ~ $15.00

eBay #187601633


================================================================
Robert A. LaBudde, PhD, PAS, Dpl. ACAFS  e-mail: spam_OUTralTakeThisOuTspamlcfltd.com
Least Cost Formulations, Ltd.                   URL: http://lcfltd.com/
824 Timberlake Drive                            Tel: 757-467-0954
Virginia Beach, VA 23464-3239                   Fax: 757-467-2947

"Vere scire est per causae scire"
================================================================

</x-flowed>

1999\10\31@064818 by Eric Richards

picon face
Give us a break?
Next you will trying to talk us into buying Thyratron tubes.
selenium diodes.
& core memory. a real hybrid. (with the pic's)

What ever happened to bubble memory that disappeared faster than it came?
{Original Message removed}

1999\10\31@080839 by paulb

flavicon
face
Eric Richards wrote:

> What ever happened to bubble memory that disappeared faster than it
> came?

 It seems - the bubble burst!?

 I suspect the actual problem was that it required just too much
engineering per bit - a material with a pattern on it designating the
bits.  And I would say the domains couldn't be made small enough.  Just
too complex.

 On a hard disk, the disk is a uniform surface, the mechanics whilst
moderately complex, define a HUGE data array on this simple surface.
With bubble memory OTOH, bigger memories meant more complexity of the
wafer, bigger wafers etc.

 Now while this is certainly true of silicon memory (DRAM), I'd say
there was just no way they'd ever get the cell size for bubble memory
anywhere near the scale of silicon memory, despite what they may have
originally imagined.

 So you have a structure that has the internal complexity of silicon
memory, *plus* the external complexity (magnets, coils, shielding) and
more of magnetic memory.

 Purely conjecture on my part of course...
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

1999\10\31@104459 by Robert A. LaBudde

flavicon
face
<x-flowed>At 11:46 PM 10/31/99 +1300, you wrote:
>Give us a break?
>Next you will trying to talk us into buying Thyratron tubes.
>selenium diodes.
>& core memory. a real hybrid. (with the pic's)

Someone couldn't find Ge transistors to use in a random number generator.

Oh, and by the way, I just found a CK722 in my transistor box.

>What ever happened to bubble memory that disappeared faster than it came?

I believe Canon is working on using up their inventory in their inkjet
printers.

================================================================
Robert A. LaBudde, PhD, PAS, Dpl. ACAFS  e-mail: .....ralKILLspamspam@spam@lcfltd.com
Least Cost Formulations, Ltd.                   URL: http://lcfltd.com/
824 Timberlake Drive                            Tel: 757-467-0954
Virginia Beach, VA 23464-3239                   Fax: 757-467-2947

"Vere scire est per causae scire"
================================================================

</x-flowed>

1999\10\31@104710 by Wagner Lipnharski

picon face
Eric Richards wrote:
> What ever happened to bubble memory that disappeared faster than it came?

The same end of rubber wheels for the old western pioneer's wagons...
something better just came up.

Wagner

1999\10\31@113414 by James Paul

flavicon
face
All,

I use to work for TI who came up with Bubble Memory, and there
were four main factors effecting it's downfall.  I've listed
them here.

1. Complexity......There were several drive circuits that were
                   critical to proper operation of the memory,
                   and these circuits were complex and difficult
                   to get just right.

2. Physical size...As memories go, Bubble memory was large in
                   comparison because of the drive circuits and
                   the coils that were required for operation.

3. Density.........Again as memories go, the bit density of the
                   bubble memories just wasn't able to compete.
                   In the beginning, the density was equal or
                   greater than than of semiconductor memory.
                   But as memories increased in size, the bubble
                   memory just couldn't keep pace.

4. Cost............This should come as no surprise.  This is
                   always a factor in everything. But the cost
                   of further development just couldn't be
                   recovered in time to make it a viable memory
                   contender in the "more is better" computer
                   industry.


 Hope this helps you understand.

                                        Regards,

                                          Jim





On Sun, 31 October 1999, "Paul B. Webster VK2BZC" wrote:

{Quote hidden}

jimspamKILLspamjpes.com

1999\10\31@155717 by Robert M. McClure

flavicon
face
At 08:32 AM 10/31/99 -0800, James Paul wrote:
> All,
>
> I use to work for TI who came up with Bubble Memory, and there
> were four main factors effecting it's downfall.  I've listed
> them here.
>
........stuff elided

A very useful analysis of the proximate cause of bubble memory downfall.
I am also a former employee of TI and would like to add a couple of
strategic notes on the problems of magnetic systems.

In the late 1950's and 1960's, TI had grand plans along a number of lines,
including a variety of magnetic systems.  At that time I had serious
reservations about the ultimate success of any of these (and expressed
them in various planning meetings) for a couple of reasons:

       1.  magnetic systems intrinsically have no gain (as opposed to
       semiconductor techniques, and would therefore always require both
       drive systems of some complexity and read systems of some complexity.

       2.  the energy storage levels of magnetic systems is also very low
       and the read amplifiers would therefore always have to be finely
       tuned.  (Note: semiconductor memories now use very low signal levels
       but in the 1960's, they did not.  Amplifier techniques have been
       developed over time, but in the 1960's were not possible.)

       3.  the amount of money being spent on magnetic systems was being
       swamped by the amount of money being spent on semiconductor technology
       by about 100:1.  It follows therefore that (barring a true invention)
       magnetic technology would also lag behind semiconductor technology.

Thus the demise of not only bubble memories, but all other flavors of
magnetic memories and logic.

Bob McClure
During

1999\10\31@164028 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
    I use to work for TI who came up with Bubble Memory, and there
    were four main factors effecting it's downfall.

    1. Complexity   2. Physical size   3. Density   4. Cost

Seems that bubble memory was so fundamentally different from other stuff
that it would have required a whole separate effort to SCALE it at anything
close to the rate of either normal magnetic memory or semiconductor memory.
I mean, Bubble memory's heyday was the late 1970's, right?  So it was
competing with 5Mbyte diskdrives (14 inch platters, fragile) and 4kbit to
16kbit dram/eprom/etc.  Now we have 50Gbyte disks (smaller and less
fragile) 64Mbit memories (DRAM, FLASH), approximately a 10,000x increase,
mostly driven my straightforward improvements in semiconductor technology
(Moore's law, etc) and customer demand that wouldn't have helped bubble
memory at all...

BillW

1999\10\31@174306 by Dave VanHorn

flavicon
face
> mostly driven my straightforward improvements in semiconductor technology
> (Moore's law, etc) and customer demand that wouldn't have helped bubble
> memory at all...


So, when will Moore's law break?
So far, it's held true, but we approach quantum level problems..
Any bets?


'[OT] Germanium transistors'
1999\11\01@072149 by Dr. Imre Bartfai
flavicon
face
HI,
I suppose one can use it for the random noise generator I have posted some
times ago.

Imre


On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, Eric Richards wrote:

> Give us a break?
> Next you will trying to talk us into buying Thyratron tubes.
> selenium diodes.
> & core memory. a real hybrid. (with the pic's)
>
> What ever happened to bubble memory that disappeared faster than it came?
> {Original Message removed}

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1999 , 2000 only
- Today
- New search...