on the chip level, some think Si photonics optoelectronic chips are treated unfairly as all the standards are written in accordance to III-V materials. Some of these standards may not be absolutely necessary for use in practice. It's why most Si photonics products are used in AOC which only have end-to-end electrical specs. Hopefully big players like Intel, IBM can change it.
I think the battle of standards is in form factor. Both Cisco and Intel rolled out their own connectors to compete with existing MPO connector for highly parallel optics. Intel and IBM&Avago even wanted to completely eliminate all current panel mount transceivers module such as QSFP+, CFP, etc. which is a big threat to many component&module suppliers. We'll see how it goes.
First of all, it is not to be confused with 100G used in telecom which used advanced modulation to achieve serial 100Gb/s. It's for datacom 100G which can be 10x10Gb/s or 4x25Gb/s, the former was adopted earlier but slower and seems being replaced by the latter as 25G electronics are getting ready. Most early advocates of 10x10G shifted to 4x25G now. No matter for telecom 100G or for datacomm 100GBASE, no 100Gb/s electronics is actually used or needed.
Wonderful article! What do you refer to by " there are no standards"? 100G standard is more mature than 40G, e.g. PM-QPSK modulation is the only one adopted in 100G,while there is no standard modulation method in 40G.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.