tod_miller's Journal: Burying Moore and his 'Law'

Comments now enabled after initial cool-off period :-)

I hope this small journal will put rest all your pandering to Moores law.

Why do I object to 'Moore's Law'

1: It is now a law but a commentary of the rate in which research is able to force transistors into a CPU. This follows cycles of research that are easily identified.

2: It hasn't even stayed the same, the law changes every time the measurement doesn't add up. If it doubled in a year, the new law if it will double in a year. If it doubles in 18 months, the new law is 18 months.

Original 1965 1 year prediction, and latter 18 month 'tweak'

2 years

So Moore's law is a prediction based on previous data, or a guess, an estimate.

Lets call it Moore's Guess. And lets not say things like:

From those dolts at M$:

Everyone knows Moore's law--the number of transistors on a chip doubles every 18 months. What a lot of people forget is that network bandwidth and storage technologies are growing at an even faster pace than Moore's law would suggest.

Yes because Moore was a cofounder of Intel, and spoke about transistors, not about network bandwidth or storage. Damn you shakes fist ineffectually at monitor

I believe you want Ciscos Law and Seagate's Ponderings to find out how fast those technologies are going to continue their developments.

Or perhaps you can just guess, or use a tealeaves and a teacup.

Please do not mention Moore, his Law, or apple tart and custard on /., as we are professionals for the most part, at heart anyway, ok I retract that statement, we do not want to mire our names in the slurry of pestilent filth that is Moore's law.