Not arguing, I just want to share a bit of the history that helps to represent "Moore's Law" slightly better.
And, for sure, I'm using other's materials:
Moore was writing about chip complexity / density trends and related economic effects
in 10 years, Mead popularize his writings in a simpler form, keeping the 2-year term, though
Intel simplified it further, approximating results and shortening each "generation" cycle to 18 nths
Thus, in its original form, Moore's observation had been holding relevance up until about late '00s. And nor that it died because of physical limiations, the world and the market changed significantly. Also, Moore's observations never intended to live for 50 years, he was prognosing about 10 years from 1965, so it's good enough, I'd say.
On my part, it's another simplification of different sources. One could check the better compliation on Wikipedia.
Or watch/listen to (higly emotional) presentation by Bryan Cantrill
A bit of offtopic, I guess?
Not arguing, I just want to share a bit of the history that helps to represent "Moore's Law" slightly better.
And, for sure, I'm using other's materials:
Thus, in its original form, Moore's observation had been holding relevance up until about late '00s. And nor that it died because of physical limiations, the world and the market changed significantly. Also, Moore's observations never intended to live for 50 years, he was prognosing about 10 years from 1965, so it's good enough, I'd say.
On my part, it's another simplification of different sources. One could check the better compliation on Wikipedia.
Or watch/listen to (higly emotional) presentation by Bryan Cantrill