Figure 2 appears to contain errors in the "Properties" column. The amorphous phase should exhibit low reflectivity and high resistance The polycrystalline phase should exhibit high reflectivity and low resistance.
The text and caption state this also.
Fort Worth TX.
The technology is indeed a productivity booster, and there are easy solutions to privacy issues. Phase-change memory blends the attributes commonly associated with NOR-type flash memory,
Data Recovery Software
Hi again. The article was originally submitted by Numonyx prior to the finalization of the acquisition. It entered the queue here (we get a lot of submissions). When it came time to post it, the acquistion had closed and we sent the article back for revision, with Micron. The version you see now, is the version Micron sent back to us.
patrick.mannion: Why should we take it easy on Mr. Atwood? He is ruining Micron's reputation. The article, as published, leaves the false impression that Micron will engage in the same phase-change memory scam that Numonyx/STM/Intel have been perpetrating for years. Mr. Atwood managed to fool at least one member of the EETimes team, Mr. Peter Clarke, who after reading Mr. Atwood's outdated article, concluded that "Micron ... has indicated that it intends to back the phase-change memory technology" - clearly an unwarranted conclusion, if the article was submitted prior to the closing of the acquisition!
Hey all, let's take it easy on Greg here. This was simply a typo. The article was originally submitted to EETimes shortly before Micron sealed the deal on its purchase of Numonyx. (Yes, Numonyx was formed through a joint venture between ST and Intel in 2008.) In the revised version sent to EETimes shortly after the deal was sealed and right before article posted, a global substitution of 'Micron' for 'Numonyx' had been implemented, which caused the error.
I should have caught it, for sure, but these things happen. I have now fixed it. Thanks for spotting this, guys! Much appreciated, as always.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.