Components you wish existed

[AndyC_772]

I'd like to see a range of P-channel power MOSFETs that include two devices back-to-back with the drains connected together.

The combination would still be a 3 terminal device, but it wouldn't conduct in either direction when switched off.

Bonus marks if it also includes two Schottky diodes and a high value resistor, so the gate is always pulled up to whichever source terminal is more positive.

[David Hess]

let me provide a hypothetical equivalency. It would be the equivalent of, if how back when the transistor was invented decades ago, if companies had just started releasing transistor radios, with germanium dies bonded to the PC boards, along with the point contacts, with the PC boards being fully potted, and the companies not selling individual transistors! You can't access the transistor, you can't salvage the transistor without destroying it, you can't use the transistor, you can't buy the transistor. All you'd have been able to get was an end application!

In a way this has always been the case with transistors though.  There no equivalents of many of the transistor types used in integrated circuits like super-beta transistors.  Actually I can think of one discrete super-beta transistor but its poor availability makes it a myth.

[David Hess]

The LM389 was a way to get 3 monolithic matched transistors inexpensively although the amplifier came in handy as well.  You could use it for instance to make temperature compensated log and antilog converters.

The transistors of a LM3046 array seems to be better matched and it's still available. Plus you can use the additional transistors for a heater circuit which stabilize the die temperature. I done this for antilog converters with good results.

I have as well with the CA3046.  There are a few others like that but availability tends to be poor and most of the parts which are not monolithic are not even matched.

I keep hoping for Linear Technology to release something since they seem to be of that mind but they never have.

[richfiles]

Again, I see your point, but they're so new not even HP has any in-hand, yet, and you're complaining about a strategy that they've not announced, unless I've missed something.

The point you are missing, is HP is talking about releasing complex integrated memristor devices in the form or memory chips in the not too distant future. They are not discussing discrete memristors, fixed configuration multi memristor integrated devices, or reconfigurable memristor array integrated devices that would allow true innovation, learning, prototyping, and experimentation by those who sorta, kinda don't have access to a chip fab.

The point is that they are seem to be focusing on one and only one particular end product, and have made little efforts to drive open evolution. Imagine a world where all the resistors, or all the capacitors, or all the inductors were taken away, and you could only get such fundamental parts as integrated into premanufactured integrated components. The concept is absurd, but that is what HP is doing!

By the time HP releases a memristor based memory, they will have proven memristors can work as a commercially viable component...

But where will the discrete memristor components be? Oh wait... They won't exist, because HP decided to keep all that internal, and aim instead for the highly profitable memory market because it provides for a potentially quick profit. They have chosen NOT to open the evolution of memristor technology, for further advancement of technology as a whole. They could release discrete devices and reconfigurable general purpose devices in parallel with their memory development. Nope! While they sit and make a memory chip, the world has no access to the "fourth fundamental circuit element", as they claim memristors to be.

It's the theoretical equivalent of a single corporate entity being the only maker of resistors, and choosing not to release them to the world, and instead only build them into finished integrated devices. It just seems so absurd!

part of me honestly wishes that the long history of memristance observations could serve as prior art to nullify some of HP's patents. Sir Humphry Davy described the first known observations of a memristive effect in 1808, and the Titanium Oxide materials were described with the effects that HP "claims" to have "discovered" back in 1968. A LOT of what HP is doing seems to be trying to corner a lucrative memory market with claims of "invention", when they weren't even first MODERN company to research resistive memory devices. Samsung, I think was looking into it back in 2003, 5 years before HP! it seems to me that HP just snagged lucrative patents and hype over their "discovery" in order to corner a new memory market. I fear they consider non memory applications entirely secondary, and are in no rush to let anyone else play with the tech if they can avoid it.

So much for fundamental fourth circuit element...

[richfiles]

let me provide a hypothetical equivalency. It would be the equivalent of, if how back when the transistor was invented decades ago, if companies had just started releasing transistor radios, with germanium dies bonded to the PC boards, along with the point contacts, with the PC boards being fully potted, and the companies not selling individual transistors! You can't access the transistor, you can't salvage the transistor without destroying it, you can't use the transistor, you can't buy the transistor. All you'd have been able to get was an end application!

In a way this has always been the case with transistors though.  There no equivalents of many of the transistor types used in integrated circuits like super-beta transistors.  Actually I can think of one discrete super-beta transistor but its poor availability makes it a myth.

"In a way this has always been the case with transistors though."
"this has always been the case"
"always been"
 

Well, my point was entirely and utterly missed... 

You COULD buy discrete transistors. You STILL can! Integrated circuits didn't even exist back then. Saying that because transistors on today's integrated circuits have different characteristics than the discrete parts they evolved from is only a characteristic of the scale and physics. That you even go so far as to say such a discrete part exists (even if utterly rare) disproves your own statement. Limited availability of one particular variant is irrelevant to the fact that it actually exists!

My POINT is arguing for a proper evolution of the technology from the bottom up, so learning, experimentation, innovation, and prototyping are possible. Your argument completely MISSED the point that transistors DID exist as discrete devices first. That integrated devices came later is great, but it also did not eliminate the discrete transistor.

I'm sorry, but I can buy a damn transistor. That it's not commonly available in every conceivable variant under the sun does not eliminate the fact that I can buy a damn transistor!

With memristors... there are NO VARIANTS available...

That would be why I'm gonna go build my own memristors, with blackjack and hookers. In fact, forget the blackjack and hookers! 

[Galaxyrise]

LT1021 hermetic with temperature sensing pin(s).  I believe hermetic parts are scheduled to return in the ceramic surface-mount package, and I suspect there's temp sensing already there, but severed after factory calibration... (There's 5 NC pins on it, after all!)  So close!

[Rigby]

Again, I see your point, but they're so new not even HP has any in-hand, yet, and you're complaining about a strategy that they've not announced, unless I've missed something.

The point you are missing, is HP is talking about releasing complex integrated memristor devices in the form or memory chips in the not too distant future. They are not discussing discrete memristors, fixed configuration multi memristor integrated devices, or reconfigurable memristor array integrated devices that would allow true innovation, learning, prototyping, and experimentation by those who sorta, kinda don't have access to a chip fab.

The point is that they are seem to be focusing on one and only one particular end product, and have made little efforts to drive open evolution. Imagine a world where all the resistors, or all the capacitors, or all the inductors were taken away, and you could only get such fundamental parts as integrated into premanufactured integrated components. The concept is absurd, but that is what HP is doing!

By the time HP releases a memristor based memory, they will have proven memristors can work as a commercially viable component...

But where will the discrete memristor components be? Oh wait... They won't exist, because HP decided to keep all that internal, and aim instead for the highly profitable memory market because it provides for a potentially quick profit. They have chosen NOT to open the evolution of memristor technology, for further advancement of technology as a whole. They could release discrete devices and reconfigurable general purpose devices in parallel with their memory development. Nope! While they sit and make a memory chip, the world has no access to the "fourth fundamental circuit element", as they claim memristors to be.

It's the theoretical equivalent of a single corporate entity being the only maker of resistors, and choosing not to release them to the world, and instead only build them into finished integrated devices. It just seems so absurd!

part of me honestly wishes that the long history of memristance observations could serve as prior art to nullify some of HP's patents. Sir Humphry Davy described the first known observations of a memristive effect in 1808, and the Titanium Oxide materials were described with the effects that HP "claims" to have "discovered" back in 1968. A LOT of what HP is doing seems to be trying to corner a lucrative memory market with claims of "invention", when they weren't even first MODERN company to research resistive memory devices. Samsung, I think was looking into it back in 2003, 5 years before HP! it seems to me that HP just snagged lucrative patents and hype over their "discovery" in order to corner a new memory market. I fear they consider non memory applications entirely secondary, and are in no rush to let anyone else play with the tech if they can avoid it.

So much for fundamental fourth circuit element...

YOU ARE NOT OWED A FUNDAMENTAL 4TH CIRCUIT ELEMENT!  A 4TH FUNDAMENTAL CIRCUIT ELEMENT IS NOT A RIGHT.

The link I shared is a video from an HP conference for people interested in server technology.  So, server topics are what is going to be covered and little else.  That conference is NOT the final word on what is going on within HP.

Holy shit, you're foaming at the mouth because of ideas that you fabricated inside your own mind based on a 30 minute video about SERVERS... 

WHERE DOES HP SAY THEY WILL NEVER EVER EVER NEVER RELEASE MEMRISTOR COMPONENTS!? 

[Zad]

Can I have a modern equivalent of the S1D13806 video generator with onboard memory? 8MB should do for up to 1920x1080, a bit more if you need alpha. It needn't do analogue, but various digital options would be nice. Oh yes, it must also be a pinned package. It needn't have ultra advanced draw hardware though.

[Tinkerer]

After reading the arguements on the memristors, I think I can say we are getting a little ahead here. On one side, there is the point that keeping things packaged together with no individual components is bad for innovation. On the other side, is the arguement that the tech is new enough that there hasnt been a chance to actually do anything.

Memristors finally came about in 2008, only 6 years ago. During this time, they have obviously been refining the approach to actually create usuable devices. It took about 7 years from demonstration to commercial device for the transistor. So the time frame isnt all that different. Obviously they want to create something that they can make money from and thats what they are doing. If another few years pass and we have yet to see any aside from HP products that include memristors, than I think the point is very valid that they are holding back innovation...who am I kidding, I would be willing to bet that the Chinese will cook up a poorly working copy within a year of them going on the market.

In all seriousness, I think we need to wait a couple more years before passing judgement on this. Could they release an individual component right now if they wanted? Probably. However, they would have to start tooling everything up for this and spend money in doing so. Instead they are tooling up to begin selling finished products, which even though contain the same part, would still need to be made differently. They stand to make more money from from a high tech assembly than they do from an individual component. This is where they are pouring their resources into regarding this. Once they start pumping out actual products, then the time will come to sit and talk on when everyone else gets to experiment with factory made parts. They are having their chance to smack the 'just discovered money tree' right now on a tech that hasnt even been in existance for a decade. If they decide to block all others access after they have had their first whack at this, then we can berate them.

Finally, why not just send them a letter asking if they plan on offering any components at some point? Wouldnt hurt, at worst you likely get a cookie cutter response.

Edit: Oops! typo!

[richfiles]

YOU ARE NOT OWED A FUNDAMENTAL 4TH CIRCUIT ELEMENT!  A 4TH FUNDAMENTAL CIRCUIT ELEMENT IS NOT A RIGHT.

The link I shared is a video from an HP conference for people interested in server technology.  So, server topics are what is going to be covered and little else.  That conference is NOT the final word on what is going on within HP.

Holy shit, you're foaming at the mouth because of ideas that you fabricated inside your own mind based on a 30 minute video about SERVERS... 

WHERE DOES HP SAY THEY WILL NEVER EVER EVER NEVER RELEASE MEMRISTOR COMPONENTS!?

Sorry, my "ideas" were not based on your video... I honestly never even noticed the link. They come from years of hearing and seeing HP do things that are, quite frankly, annoying. I'll admit, I've watched countless videos and read countless documents... I have not seen this server video, so it was never applicable to the nature of any of my replies. Only my prior knowledge.

I know for a fact that multiple hobbyists, myself as well as other EEVblog members amongst that number, have successfully created and experimented with our own memristors on the lab bench, while HP has "claimed" their technology is not "suited" to discrete components. As far as I am concerned, HP is spewing bullshit. Nyle Steiner was probably one of the first hobbyists to achieve the effect. I've been working on sandwiching multiple point contact style memristors, based on his work, between two PC boards myself. One memristor is never enough! 

I've been listening to HP's rhetoric since they first announced their "discovery". I'll be the first to admit that yes, I am pretty aggravated that they are telling people who HAVE CREATED working memristors that they can't make discrete components. It comes down to one simple fact. HP is in the computing business, and wants to hit up the lucrative memory market. They have no interest in innovation, unless it is fully internal, and will appease the almighty shareholder.

Here is a rather old (2010) video that is rather comprehensive, for reference:
11:10 Acknowledging the existence of pinched hysteresis observance prior to 1971, without giving up the claim of "inventing" it.
17:15 Claims memristance is unobservable at larger scales (true technically, but people ARE observing it with hand made components).
29:07 They admit to creating in house FPGA style memristor devices... Yet they gotta release that memory first, you know!
46:56 "I mean, right now we're just sorta looking at this as a non volatile memory system"... That says it right there. They speak of disruptive ideas, and what other things people can do... but they don't REALLY want people outside HP making those developments. Not really.

What do I take from this video? HP has not really shared with the world with this internally produced FPGA... They keep talking bout memory, which is a good thing, but is not all memristors are good for. It's just what they are most profitable for. Even discussing the FPGA, they speak of it's use in digital switching, in emulating an FPGA's digital logic functionality, but simply with better density. They fail to consider the potential for an analog FPGA style device, or at least have not made clear that the functionality is there.

That is why I am not holding my breath for HP to really follow through on any of those promises, any time soon... Except for memory...

LOL, the delays are probably cause the NSA is buying it all up for their fancy-schmancy data logging center!

[T3sl4co1l]

In a way this has always been the case with transistors though.  There no equivalents of many of the transistor types used in integrated circuits like super-beta transistors.  Actually I can think of one discrete super-beta transistor but its poor availability makes it a myth.

Matching is pretty much out, so there's that.  Also the incredibly low propagation delay between nearby components.

But most of the rest is available -- I think 2N5088 is equivalent to LM741 era ICs (~40V process), though with area (and thus current capacity) around what would be used for the output devices (not of op-amps, but more comparable to like TL431 or 78L05 pass devices, maybe LM386 too).  RF MOSFETs dating from the same period (I don't know numbers offhand) are close to e.g. CD4007, though without the crappy performance (slow -- unusually high internal resistances and capacitances).  Higher performance devices (low voltage CMOS, or BiCMOS, on up to modern SiGe processes) are reflected by various RF devices.  Usually at vastly greater current capacity (>10s mA, instead of ~uA for the smallest structures), just because of physical size and ability to drive transmission lines.

But superbeta I don't think is very common, so you've got that point.  Last of that sort I bought was 2SD1273 (60V 3A -- unusual!), which had been in stock (NRND) at Mouser.  They've long since disappeared, of course.  The unfortunate truth of it, I guess, is, when do you actually need that?  They're much slower, so you can't really use them in switching applications.  For almost everything else, you don't need the hFE, a TIP31 or whatever will work.  I've mostly used them in low bias followers for simple power supplies.

Tim

[T3sl4co1l]

You COULD buy discrete transistors. You STILL can! Integrated circuits didn't even exist back then. Saying that because transistors on today's integrated circuits have different characteristics than the discrete parts they evolved from is only a characteristic of the scale and physics. That you even go so far as to say such a discrete part exists (even if utterly rare) disproves your own statement. Limited availability of one particular variant is irrelevant to the fact that it actually exists!

My POINT is arguing for a proper evolution of the technology from the bottom up, so learning, experimentation, innovation, and prototyping are possible. Your argument completely MISSED the point that transistors DID exist as discrete devices first. That integrated devices came later is great, but it also did not eliminate the discrete transistor.

I'm sorry, but I can buy a damn transistor. That it's not commonly available in every conceivable variant under the sun does not eliminate the fact that I can buy a damn transistor!

With memristors... there are NO VARIANTS available...

That would be why I'm gonna go build my own memristors, with blackjack and hookers. In fact, forget the blackjack and hookers! 

So what?  It's a novelty component.  If you want to play with one, slap together an integrator with an analog multiplier and make one.  It's not a particularly useful component (despite academics cheering about theory and symmetry), and physical (rather than synthesized) examples, such as used in the memory, probably have awful properties (consistency, accuracy, drift, tempco), barely good enough for storing data.

That said, I should think something like an MOV or thermistor could be constructed to exhibit the same behavior in bulk, so you could have a memristor with real watts capacity and hundreds to k's of resistance range.

Tim

[David Hess]

Here is a simpler but unimportant request: a Sziklai transistor arrangement in one cheap jellybean package.

IGBT transistors come pretty close to implementing that, albiet with a PNP and a high voltage N channel mosfet in the same package.

I would not mind having complementary IGBTs for linear applications but P-channel IGBTs are another part whose availability makes it a myth.

[richfiles]

You COULD buy discrete transistors. You STILL can! Integrated circuits didn't even exist back then. Saying that because transistors on today's integrated circuits have different characteristics than the discrete parts they evolved from is only a characteristic of the scale and physics. That you even go so far as to say such a discrete part exists (even if utterly rare) disproves your own statement. Limited availability of one particular variant is irrelevant to the fact that it actually exists!

My POINT is arguing for a proper evolution of the technology from the bottom up, so learning, experimentation, innovation, and prototyping are possible. Your argument completely MISSED the point that transistors DID exist as discrete devices first. That integrated devices came later is great, but it also did not eliminate the discrete transistor.

I'm sorry, but I can buy a damn transistor. That it's not commonly available in every conceivable variant under the sun does not eliminate the fact that I can buy a damn transistor!

With memristors... there are NO VARIANTS available...

That would be why I'm gonna go build my own memristors, with blackjack and hookers. In fact, forget the blackjack and hookers! 

So what?  It's a novelty component.  If you want to play with one, slap together an integrator with an analog multiplier and make one.  It's not a particularly useful component (despite academics cheering about theory and symmetry), and physical (rather than synthesized) examples, such as used in the memory, probably have awful properties (consistency, accuracy, drift, tempco), barely good enough for storing data.

That said, I should think something like an MOV or thermistor could be constructed to exhibit the same behavior in bulk, so you could have a memristor with real watts capacity and hundreds to k's of resistance range.

Tim

Transistors were once an over expensive, terribly fragile novelty component, in an era where valves were the defacto standard technology. People understood they could mark an improvement and a fundamental shrinking of technology, with reduced power needs than valves... but yes, even in the very early days, transistor were once novelty components. They VERY quickly found their niche with the transistor radio, and then made their way into computing applications, other audio amplification devices, operational amplifiers, etc. Sound familiar? ICs were once quite frivolously novel. Chips were out for a WHILE before they were universally adopted. Between the US military buying every last one they could find, and their expense, people saw no need to integrate what could be made cheaper with a few transistors. Eventually, the market caught up, and that changed.

I hope that changes with memristors sooner than later...

My interest has always been in the neural / synaptic potential of memristors. It's a field with little research, and it pertains to my own interests. The fact that people dismiss memristors so easily is exactly WHY it's so necessary to be able to experiment with the real deal. The experimenters, the prototypers, the curious! Those are the ones who will come up with the idea, or stumble on some unexpected configuration that the next person misses! not everyone can see passed the everyday.

It just feels like wasted potential, mixed with a bit of hypocrisy. HP says they want to usher a new revolution with a "fourth fundamental circuit element",  but they expect that revolution to be on their shoulders, and that everyone must follow their path. No thanks. How bout they give me a component that I can be creative with! Revolutionary memory is great! FPGAs are great as well, but give us not just an FPGA that is enhanced through the integration of memristors to make it more dense, but give us an... I dunno, let's call it an FCMA - a Field Configurable Memristor Array, that doesn't just perform digital logic using memristors to achieve better density, but actually uses something like CMOS analog switches (as in similar to a CD4051, for example) to create a truly user accessible memristor array that an be reconfigured into custom analog circuits. Even having a small 16 pin chip containing 8 individual memristors would be great! Maybe we could have a 20 pin IC that has 16 memristor interconnect lines (connecting to 8 memristors), but features CMOS analog switches internally to switch banks, and has 2 wires to either select from a multitude of banks (each bank being 8 memristors) via serial commands, or has 4 banks selected by a 2 bit code. A 24 pin IC could easily contain 64 banks of 8 memristors (6 bit binary bank selection). 32 or 512 individual memristors might not sound like much at all, but consider that in the hands of a resourceful experimenter, they would be IDEAL learning tools, and I know I could personally use such a device myself. Another option would be small crossbar latch style chips. An 18 pin chip could easily contain 16 rows and a pair of columns. a 20 pin chip could do a 16x4 crossbar latch, as a 24 pin chip would enable a 16x8 configuration. An additional option would be to have disable lines that isolate a column's memristors from adjacent columns (using analog CMOS switches), to allow hard setting the memristor states via isolation, or alternately, enabling or disabling the memristor connection at that point ( a little CMOS logic plus an additional memristor to store the state of that matrix point). I'm rambling on about a potential entire LINE of memristor based small scale integrated chips. Kinda pointless at this point. Even just the FPGA style chip with accessibility to analog compatible I/O fed directly to the memristors would be AMAZING!

I just have issue with the fact that HP COULD create such devices, and sell them to the world so they could learn the new technology and become even more excited at the potential... But they instead just keep all of it internal, and promise memories. I can only store data with a memory. I can't really experiment with neural synaptic devices, or other people experiment with the non linear analog aspects of memristors... Not unless someone creates such parts.

The point of my entire argument, is I believe HP has completely missed the point and forgotten that they can develop all they want internally, but if they want the technology to take off, the WORLD needs to adopt it, and that means teaching the technology by doing... Letting the world get their hands dirty with memristors!

I wouldn't BE here on this blog's forum if I didn't want to get my hands dirty!

If I sound agitated, it's cause I'm tired of rhetoric, and i've been hearing it for more than half a decade! What can I say? I understand that HP wants to pay the bills and bring home a new Aston Martin for shareholder's A through V (W to Y each want a Ferrari, and Z wants a Lambo! LOL)  Still, there really isn't any reason at all that a small team could devolop their in house development silicon into real world applicable devices, such as small scale memristor arrays. Such devices would NOT compete with their memory product line, and would not threaten their internal development! Releasing small scale memristor devices would only educate the world of the potential of their new technology! I just have not seen any indication that they are actually doing anything of the sort!

HP is focusing on the evolution of existing concepts with new technology. They want to make what exists faster, denser, more unified... More evolved, but they are not thinking outside the box. They don't have that spark of innovation that asks, what can we do with this that hasn't been done EVER before! They just ask how we can make a shit ton of cash making mundane, but far superior memory.

[JFA]

I'd quite like a component with the same characteristics as a finger, as that cures so many RF woes.

You're getting into digital device design?

[Psi]

What would be nice are lithium coin cells in 2032 etc. sizes  with the same capacity as now, but with really low internal resistance so it can supply a couple of hundred mA. Peak current delivery is often more of a limiting factor than capacity in long-life wireless devices. Imagine if you could send an SMS from a 2032.

There was a company making those, but ive not been able to find their website for a few years.
I suspect they went out of business.

The high current 2032's they sold were quite expensive for no good reason, other than maybe low sales.

[Psi]

A basic MCU similar to a AVR/PIC but which ran at an internal clock speed of 1+ghz.
16/32bit core would be better but i'd be totally happy with an 8bit core.
Price would be <$10 in qty of 10

The raw power of 1+ghz would be quite useful in cases where you would otherwise have to go FPGA or full on ARM CPU with associated parts (DDR/flash etc).

http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/XS1-L8A-128-QF124-I10/XS1-L8A-128-QF124-I10-ND/3906735
Its 2x 32bit, and package, QFN124, is a bit unwieldy, but otherwise what you wanted
Then you have 4 core ARMv7 at >1GHz at $5
http://www.cnx-software.com/2014/06/23/allwinner-a33-tablet-price/

Yeah, mike posted a few pages back showing me XMOS.
It's not really 1ghz, the speed is the sum of all cores. So a 4 core 1000MIPS xmos chip  = 4x ~250mhz cpus.

It's still really interesting though, for the price.
I wonder what the development environment is like, should be able to code with gcc since the cores are ARM.

[T3sl4co1l]

Transistors were once an over expensive, terribly fragile novelty component, in an era where valves were the defacto standard technology. People understood they could mark an improvement and a fundamental shrinking of technology, with reduced power needs than valves... but yes, even in the very early days, transistor were once novelty components.

I disagree.  In gross terms, they operate exactly the same as the existing dominant technology of their day.  Interface and design migration was easy and rapid, limited only by availability and cost.  The advantages were (are) dramatic, and immediately apparent.

None of these is the case with the element in question.

Compare to magnetic amplifiers: they can be used in, sort of generally the same way as transistors, and have reasonable on/off ratio, linearity and gain.  Never really caught on, beyond a few peculiar uses (notable cases: core RAM, 3.3V regulator in ATX supplies).

As the rest of your post seems utterly intent on bashing HP's research model, I shall disregard.  Good day,

Tim

[richfiles]

Transistors were once an over expensive, terribly fragile novelty component, in an era where valves were the defacto standard technology. People understood they could mark an improvement and a fundamental shrinking of technology, with reduced power needs than valves... but yes, even in the very early days, transistor were once novelty components.

I disagree.  In gross terms, they operate exactly the same as the existing dominant technology of their day.  Interface and design migration was easy and rapid, limited only by availability and cost.  The advantages were (are) dramatic, and immediately apparent.

None of these is the case with the element in question.

Compare to magnetic amplifiers: they can be used in, sort of generally the same way as transistors, and have reasonable on/off ratio, linearity and gain.  Never really caught on, beyond a few peculiar uses (notable cases: core RAM, 3.3V regulator in ATX supplies).

As the rest of your post seems utterly intent on bashing HP's research model, I shall disregard.  Good day,

Tim

The duration of novelty doesn't change the fact that, yes, at one time, even transistors were an expensive novelty. Fortunately, for transistors, they VERY rapidly found viable applications and dropped in price, while gaining availability. Additionally, the first transistors to be created were of the bipolar junction variety, in 1947. It wasn't until the FET was created, around 1960 or so, that transistors truly mimicked the specific characteristics of valves more closely. 13 years passed before that happened! Before that, you had to rethink the circuit from what you would have done using valves, not that it wasn't amazing that you could. Like I said, transistors QUICKLY became mainstream, faster than a significantly landscape altering technology like memristors.

One of the areas people forget about, is the logic capacity of memristors. These are devices that switch states and then stay that way with no applied power. A transistor must be powered to be on. A memristor needs only be powered to change states. There have been theories that this would allow lower power consumption for processors and other types of logic hardware. HP also claims to have seen some efficiencies in compiling instructions to run on their unique hardware configuration. This is both an increase in speed and a reduction of power wasted as heat. Memristors have also proven to be capable of being made extraordinarily small. That adds a density bonus to their score.

My issue, again, stems only from the fact that there has been no positive discussion on the possibility of discrete memristors, by HP, and the FPGA claims are only in chip fabrication efficiencies, and not related to user accessible memristance... All memristor function on the proposed FPGA is simply to provide a more efficient chip. I'm just saying that HP seems to be dead set focused on making money with memory. There is NOTHING wrong with that, but at least put an effort to move small scale components to market for educators, experimenters, prototypers, and hobbyists.

Is that truly so hard to ask for?

No, what I see is the industry feeling they do not have to service a discrete industry at all, since the future of industry is in integration. I would say this is a very bad precedent to set. They only see the internal developments for their own short term business model, without seeing the bigger picture of where an industry with no foundation of tinkerers and experimenter will lead them. NO ONE coming into HP in the near future will have memristor experience. The company likely must train everyone new in from scratch. There is no room for innovation if the technology is hidden behind closed doors, and the only thing you get is an application specific black box that can only store digital data.

[Rasz]

xcore

Yeah, mike posted a few pages back showing me XMOS.
It's not really 1ghz, the speed is the sum of all cores. So a 4 core 1000MIPS xmos chip  = 4x ~250mhz cpus.

It's still really interesting though, for the price.
I wonder what the development environment is like, should be able to code with gcc since the cores are ARM.

its two 500MHz cpus glued internally, 4 threads each, so 1000/8.
Dev env is Eclipse, language is basically C. You can have one thread handle 100Mbit ethernet PHY, another one doing TCP/IP, another bitbanging SDcard at full 50MHz in 4bit mode.

[owiecc]

I'd like a multichannel transmitter/receiver working with a single fibre.

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

Here's another : MicroSD cards in light colours so you can write on them

I thought it was only the big ones that had the write lock.


Ok I wish I hadn't said that.

[Precipice]

I'd like a multichannel transmitter/receiver working with a single fibre.

This probably exists, depending on what you want... Not necessarily difficult or expensive, either.

[owiecc]

This probably exists, depending on what you want... Not necessarily difficult or expensive, either.

I would imagine they are common in telecommunication sector. I'd like something cheap to connect e.g. DSP with a gate driver. Send PWM/sync signal one way and send status/diagnostic data back over a single fiber. Can you buy something like this?

[Precipice]

I would imagine they are common in telecommunication sector. I'd like something cheap to connect e.g. DSP with a gate driver. Send PWM/sync signal one way and send status/diagnostic data back over a single fiber. Can you buy something like this?

Ah, 'and back over a single fiber' - harder, I've not seen such a thing retail. I use one fibre there, one fibre back.
Serialisers that let you stuff parallel data down a fibre (and reassemble it at the far end) are quite common. I'm still working my way few a few sticks of AMD TAXI-chip (search will find you stuff) that do exactly this, at 125MBaud, with embedded syncs if you want. I use them to get data in & out of EMC chambers (although I have more recently stuck  an mbed micro in, and use it to drive fibre ethernet). The TAXI chips are fast enough that I can send PWM and FM encoded analogue on individual data pins with reasonable results.