hey thanks for the response
We were confident because the availability of that process was predicted by Moore's Law and any number of foundries were spending billions to make it happen.
Right, so did you just use Moore's Law or did you look at other factors as well?
What I mean by other factors:
> Trends of the capacity of other recent products? Did you look at teh speeds of CMOS processes from that company over the last 10 years and extrapolate?
> Did you talk to a sales rep or engineer or product development manager at the CMOS process company and **ASK THEM** how fast their upcomming models would be (approximately)
> Do literature review of what academic research groups and possible FOSS (idk if it applies for you) were doing in that CMOS wireless type transciever tech? My former university, Ball State University did research for WiMax coverage and speed for Cisco (before WiMax was ditched)...did you look at any of that to predict the CMOS process capability you needed?
I'm trying to be polite, but I call BS.
If you claim your company made that decision based **soley** on math from Moore's Law....well I have a hard time believe that claim's veracity. You are either fabricating or that company is not very wise. And if you company **did** use other factors, then that kind of invalidates your point and parenthetically supportsy my point...I won't deny that using it **might** have added value, but only IF you also did common practices like I mentioned above...
Seriously...did you use other factors besides Moore's Law?
Like asking the vendor? (or any of the others mentioned above)
Of course we used all kinds of inputs into our planning process. We would have been fools not to.
I feel like you're doing a bit of "move the goal posts" here. First you very emphatically state that "[Moore's Law] is NOT and HAS NEVER BEEN fit to predict anything invovling money or resources"
I gave you a reply from experience that that is not true, and in fact companies do use (or at least used to) use Moore's Law in their planning process (where money and resources are involved).
Now you saying I'm claiming my company invested millions blindly because we had some faith in Moore's Law. Of course we didn't, and I don't think I implied that.
First off, looking at the speed improvements from the foundry over the last 10 years as evidence is pretty much the same thing as following Moore's Law.
Second, as I'm sure you know, sales reps will say "YES" to anything, so Moore's Law helps put things in context. If they are saying something way better than Moore's Law, you have to be skeptical.
Basically, I disagree that the fact that we used a variety of factors (like virtually any company will do for any decision) invalidates my point. You said that Moore's Law isn't fit for predicting things. I disagree.
If you would have said "Moore's Law isn't fit for making significant investments in the absence of other factors or critical thinking" then I would agree with you.