Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventions

By: AM (myname4rwt.delete@this.jee-male.com), June 25, 2019 7:51 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
I stumbled upon this article which discusses several important inventions in computing https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor-manufacturers/intel/272965-1971-is-the-year-that-intel-changed-the-world/ and as it contained a number of glaring inaccuracies, I sent Daniel an email.

Much to my surprize, the response I got was not a "Thank you for the corrections" and a fixed article, but a threat of contacting a legal counsel on the grounds of harassment! As unbelievable as it sounds, it's true.

Flabbergasted and wondering whether he said it in earnest or in jest, I replied that he'd better keep me cc'd then, since I'd really love to see the response he would receive and asked him whether he has any problem with me making my email to him public then, suggesting in my last email that in case he's really not going to get the facts in the article right, I'd take his silence as "no problem" and would go ahead with it.

Well, with no answer from him and unfixed article (and it's been nearly a full day since I emailed him), I hereby post my email which gets a few facts right and contains a couple of my favorite sources on the history of semiconductors clearly showing Intel's real role in several landmark inventions, so happy reading and watching the talk, folks.

--- start of email
Once in a while I go to SemiWiki as you tend to cover events of interest to me, but it's on rare occasions when I don't spot factual inaccuracies or author incompetence (e.g. like last time when I emailed you seeing someone, apparently having no idea about the origin of "the number of people" joke -- obviously an outsider to professional semiconductor circles, or just a clueless writer -- used it in an article.

I have just checked Semiwiki wondering whether you finally posted anything on VLSI Symposia on Technology and Circuits and stumbled upon your recent article and a post only to find that what shocked me a year ago when I joined your forum and got banned, is apparently a usual story.

Here are a few excerpts from your post and article:

Your comment "TSMC 7+ is an orphan due to 6nm." from
https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/is-intel-10nm-really-denser-than-tsmc-7nm.11400/
is total and utter crap.
With the node utilized by at least A13 and next-gen Kirin and corresponding production volumes, no sane person would call it an "orphan process". Are you really unaware of that?

https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor-manufacturers/intel/272965-1971-is-the-year-that-intel-changed-the-world/
"Even though Intel had invented the DRAM,"
They didn't. DRAM was invented in mid 1960s by Dennard at IBM.

"In 1970 Intel introduced the 1103 — the world’s first DRAM. "
"So, in 1971 Intel commercialized the first DRAM,"

Apart from the fact that you are apparently confused about the year 1103 was introduced, no, Intel didn't even commercialize the DRAM, much less invent it: the first DRAMs came from such companies as Fairchild, Four-Phase Systems, Advanced Memory Systems, and there could well be other pioneers in the early years I'm not recalling.

"(In fact, by the time 1973 had ended, the 1103 was the biggest selling chip in the world.)"
Beg your pardon, but according to what/whom? Your crystal ball? Tea leaves in your cup?

The funny -- and quite telling -- thing about you is that while you refrain from providing sources for such claims, you're quick at pointing out this fault with others:
"The question I have is: Where does Wikichip get their data? I don't see any references."
https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/is-intel-10nm-really-denser-than-tsmc-7nm.11400/post-41255

"So, in 1971 Intel commercialized the first DRAM, introduced the first floating gate memory, and introduced the first microprocessor."
In fact, the original idea behind floating-gate memories came not from Intel, but from Bell Labs and was published in their tech journal in 1960s.

And Intel didn't invent the microprocessor either (nor were they first at making one). That credit goes to Four-Phase Systems instead.

https://semiwiki.com/john-east/259604-the-integrated-circuit/
"Today we’re doing on the order of 64 billion [transistors]."
This means you don't pay attention to the trend at all, however checking Wikipedia would have been easy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count

Or reading your DRAM article https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor-manufacturers/intel/259797-intel-let-there-be-ram/ -- and again not a single word about Dennard and companies who introduced DRAMs ahead of Intel.

With facts misrepresented this strong in Intel's favor, I guess it's not a coincidence that they asked you to do density comparison for their 10nm vs foundries' 7nm processes (the topic of Intel's 10nm process and Intel's actual chip-level transistor density when I joined Semiwiki a year ago again comes to mind):
https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/is-intel-10nm-really-denser-than-tsmc-7nm.11400/post-41255

Intel's modus operandi in those early years can be characterized as shrewd and going aggressively after opportunities they saw in open print, learned from other companies or were presented with by serendipity.

*As a company*, Intel is incredibly stupid and has been that way for a long time now; things they succeeded at are definitely not thanks to their operation as a company (in other words, as a team of like-minded and dedicated individuals working in cooperation towards the same goal) -- this company's current success rests entirely on IBM's choice the company did in 1980, and when it comes to Intel's technological advancements and achievements, which are undeniable, they are not thanks to their corporate culture, but *despite* its toxicity and are entirely due to a number of extremely bright people this company was blessed with, many of whom happened to be separated by a firewall of one sort or another from Intel's poisonous influences and whom Intel as a company owes eternal debt of gratitude for their accomplishments.

So if all these claims result from honest lack of knowledge, then you should really read a number of good sources on these subjects -- better late than never, right? When it comes to microprocessors and DRAM, check among other things materials related to Lee Boysel; to give you a couple of links start with, say,
http://ece.umich.edu/bicentennial/stories/lee-boysel-the-early-history-of-microprocessing.html
https://www.eecs.umich.edu/eecs/about/articles/2007/Boysel-07.pdf (pay attention to the bits related to Bob Noyce and what was Intel's response to the AL1 demo, last slide) and go from there.

If, by chance, you have never heard about the real inventors or authors of original ideas behind DRAM and floating-gate memories either -- search and you'll find (maybe not on Wikipedia, but ask nicely and I'll send you some good ones).

But whatever the case is (honest lack of knowledge or lying for money), please stop spreading this nonsense how Intel invented this and that and everything.

Give credit to people and companies who deserve it.

In fact, that's yet another indication which goes to show either how little a clue you actually have, or how blatant a lie you keep spreading through your site deliberately, so no wonder you'd rather ban someone like me than risk exposure to the public eye -- my posting record at RWT you were free to check (and I suspect you did so) is well-known for getting the board somewhat cleaner from trolls and shills of all grades and levels.

You're pretty much like Scotten Jones in fact -- lots of experience, lots of highly specific info in your head, but either complete inability to think and arrive at correct conclusions beyond tiny thinking boxes and patterns you're used to, or lying for money to your readers -- no wonder I got banned immediately after "catching his hand" making false claims in his forum posts and an article he ran one of those days.
--- end of email

PS Daniel pointed out to me that the author of the text is in fact not him, but John East, however considering that the article has his name as the author and for some reason doesn't even start with quoting John East which is a universal and established practice, he is obviously in the best position to post corrections anyway, not to mention his responsibility for Semiwiki contents in general as the site owner.
 Next Post in Thread >
TopicPosted ByDate
Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 07:51 AM
  Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsDummond D. Slow2019/06/25 08:05 AM
    Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 09:47 AM
      Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsanon2019/06/25 11:17 AM
        Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 12:06 PM
  Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAdrian2019/06/25 08:50 AM
    Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 09:43 AM
    Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsDavid Hess2019/07/02 11:20 AM
  Not worth readinganon2019/06/25 08:58 AM
    Not worth readingFoo_2019/06/25 09:37 AM
      Not worth readingAndrei2019/06/26 03:30 AM
    Linked stuff clarifies who invented whatAM2019/06/25 09:38 AM
  You are being an asshole and this deserves no reply (NT)noone2019/06/25 09:46 AM
  Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsDoug S2019/06/25 10:05 AM
    Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 10:27 AM
    Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsMaynard Handley2019/06/25 10:36 AM
      Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/25 11:25 AM
        Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsDoug S2019/06/25 01:24 PM
          Daniel Nenni (Semiwiki) and Intel's role in landmark inventionsAM2019/06/26 11:08 AM
    Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes? (NT)Michael S2019/06/25 03:21 PM
      Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes?Andrei2019/06/26 05:35 AM
      Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes?Doug S2019/06/26 10:42 AM
        Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes?Michael S2019/06/26 02:23 PM
          Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes?Doug S2019/06/26 03:32 PM
            Why would Kirin have far smaller production volumes?Michael S2019/06/26 03:42 PM
Reply to this Topic
Name:
Email:
Topic:
Body: No Text
How do you spell green?