Sounds like good news for the nanoelectronics research institute IMEC. What I'm curious about is how all these companies will be collaborating. Is the institute serving as facility where research can be done (like a machine shop renting out space for development) or are the participating companies jointly funding research. Sounds like an intellectual property challenge - especially with all the cross licensed patents already in play.
So resistor what is your opinion about this decision by Qualcomm? If IP generation at a research institute is a complication, what does Qualcomm expect from this collaboration? is it only a sort of elite club or you think that something good will come out from this joint research? I am based in EU so I am welcoming any initiative that will help Europe not to be relegated at the periphery in the semi world
It certainly was the case that most of the companies that are mentioned have researchers on secondment to Leuven, Belgium. This gives them the opportunity to run wafers on EUV machines...test structures and so on.
A lot of effort goes into defining the scope of the intellectual property so that the companies know which bits are communal IP which all the participants get to share.
I believe they run test structures.
There is some data that is private and some that is communal.
I suspect some wafers are communal and some private and confidential.
Things like lithography metrics benefit from totalling everybodies' wafers.
@supersonic76, I was checking up on this. Indeed, I would think even 32 nm hp is not yet nailed down, given the serious LER (well exceeding 10%). That's why there has even been talk of EUV being used in double patterning context, like complementary lithography proposed by Intel. Of course, consideration of double patterning defeats purpose of considering EUV.
For technologies which are equally extremely high risk to all companies (like EUV), it makes sense to have the collaboration model, with actual data and information being shared. For technologies of unequally high risk (like FinFETs) the value may be realized only for some companies, e.g., Qualcomm instead of Intel in the case of FinFETs.
What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.