Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
10/30/09
Not to mention the savings in the board architecture since you wouldn't need the bridge to the RAM and the connection to the hard drives.
Food for thought. #intelphasechangingmemory
10/29/09
Imagine being able to power down your devices and go back to exactly where you left off microseconds after turning them back on.
10/29/09
10/29/09
The difference here is that this is a general type of technology and not one proprietary product.
Hard drives and flash memory were both rather expensive in their respective infancies as well. #intelphasechangingmemory
10/29/09
Second, RDRAM was a *volatile* memory like pretty much every other kind of DRAM. Fast, but you turn the power off and you lose data. This new tech will allow you to have DRAM speeds *and* have the ability to turn the power off. It's not just a competing technology like RDRAM was to SDRAM, it's a memory evolution. Also, this new memory will allow read/write lifetimes on par with SDRAM (or perhaps exceeding it) meaning that all the drawbacks of flash memory are eliminated. Finally it will be possible to truly replace spinning drives with a superior technology. #intelphasechangingmemory
10/29/09
10/29/09
No, a general type of technology would be something akin to a 32 nm die process, or a particular technique for storing data on optical media, or the difference between DRAM and 1T DRAM.
RDRAM was a proprietary standard of dynamic RAM made by the Rambus Corporation. Netburst was a particular CPU architecture based on the x86 instruction set. IA-64 is a particular instruction set.
We're talking about apples, oranges, and apple smoothies here. Phase-change memory isn't some proprietary rehash of existing standards that's just bound to suck money out of consumer's pockets, and it's not some new competing standard to stir up the status quo. This is a fundamental change in the underlying technology of solid state data storage. Once it becomes viable for mass production, you can bet it will be compatible with existing hardware, in this case, most likely as a USB drive or an SATA SSD.
So yes, expense has everything to do with it. It will likely have a high initial expense, as most things do, and when production scales up and production techniques are refined, prices will reach more accessible levels. #intelphasechangingmemory
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
"Re-route the main computer's Phase-changing Memory Array through the EPS conduits!" Yeah... that'll work. #intelphasechangingmemory
10/30/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
Seems like a good idea at first, but just wait until all coffee gets distributed as lossy diluted dreck, and the only way coffee makers can make any money is putting on shows and selling t-shirts while coffee lovers the world over download compressed versions of the beverage for free.
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09
I'm thinking cost of materials or toxicity or some other thing, but we'll see.
08/21/09
08/21/09
08/21/09