Games may be a large market for high-performance computing, and thus of this technology. But I think what keeps getting lost in this discussion is that high-performance computing will not remain the only stratum where this technology is needed/useful. That's why I said "Remember Ethernet?" to remind us of how those speeds have continued to increase while the need for them has migrated down the performance spectrum. Faster data transfer is and will be needed everywhere, including personal computing devices.
OK, Ann. It still seems that the largest market for high performance computing is in the games area. Of course I realize that the level of power for games is less than that of the high level scientific computers, but thye sales ratio is quite large.
But your comment about servers does indeed point to an area that I had not considered. So now for a question about the "wide" optical interconnect: would it be point to point, or would it be more like a bus? Point to point between adjacent boards could still be done by some other means, while a bus with multiple sources and multiple listners would be an entirely different realm. Very demanding of precise construction and alignment, and probably susceptible to the same problems that lead to hard drives now using the sata interconnect format.
How right you are about the uses of the term "application." And slang, too, although it's fun, often is confusing. However, I was not using "application" to mean a program, or class of programs, but a class of uses--for instance if I write "aerospace applications," this does not mean aerospace software, but various uses in the aerospace industry.
Ann, sorry if I caused confusion by using the word "application". My usage relates to what the word was taken to mean in the past, instead of a corrupted abbreviation for the phrase "application program." Lazy-mouthed slang terms seldom are able to convey a specific meaning accurately, it seems.
I am aware that language does indeed change with usage, but hearing a slang term used to reference somethoing that many people really don't have any understanding of what they are talking about does become rather boring. At least I find repetition without understanding to be boring.
William, I'm not sure where computer gaming as an app for this technology comes from. The "apps" are more in classes of hardware--supercomputers, routers/switches, PCs--than in uses of the hardware. If you mean the technology may eventually come to gaming platforms, I agree--but then, it will also come to PCs and other consumer computing devices. And of course, price/performance tradeoffs will be one determining factor. But, in comms and connectors, that's not enough: market saturation will rule the day.
Ann, you may be correct about data centerapplications, but i suspect that the market for computer gaming toys is much larger. Of course, it will all get down to the ratio of cost-to benefits, won't it?
William, the article mentions supercomputing and datacenters, not computer gaming, for right-now apps. As a long-time student of comms technologies, I know that what starts at the high end--such as those two apps--ends up in the PC, at least as far as data transfer speeds are concerned. Remember when 100 MBps was fast? In the datacenter?
I am a bit familiar with radio frequency waveguides, but not optical ones, other than fiber optics. So thanks for the links.
But it still seems that there are very few applications that would benefit from the very high speed multiple line connections, since it appears that the concept is for these links to carry at least 8-bits wide, and probably 32 0r 64-bit wide data. For single-line interconnections they would probably not be cost effective.
My guess is that the main application would be in medical image processing, which is a growing but rather narrow field. If there are others it would be interesting to hear about them. But computer gaming does not count as a valid application, at least in my book.
William, sounds like you're unclear on the waveguide concept. I suggest you read up on them, and specifically on this board-level one. Wikipedia has a good article on the general subject. The "suitable problem" already exists and the R&D has been going on for some time to implement these at the board level. There's also a fair amount of detail in the links we gave in this article.
In many engineering workplaces, there’s a generational conflict between recent engineering graduates and older, more experienced engineers. However, a recent study published in the psychology journal Cognition suggests that both may have something to learn from another group: 4 year olds.
Conventional wisdom holds that MIT, Cal Tech, and Stanford are three of the country’s best undergraduate engineering schools. Unfortunately, when conventional wisdom visits the topic of best engineering schools, it too often leaves out some of the most distinguished programs that don’t happen to offer PhD-level degrees.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.