Eventually to maintain the law we would have to make the item bigger so it can contain more transistors. Which defeats the spirit of the law which is miniaturisation.
Reading Moore’s paper (which is the reference of the marketing person who coined the term), Moore’s law isn’t just miniaturisation, it was also an observation that’s the economics would improve. ie that building N transistors is cheaper on the next smaller node than the previous.
And without the economics working, the shrinking would never have occurred at the rate it did for so long.
So yes, it getting bigger would be against the spirit of the law.
Removed by mod
Eventually to maintain the law we would have to make the item bigger so it can contain more transistors. Which defeats the spirit of the law which is miniaturisation.
Removed by mod
Do you think we’re somewhere on the second part of the curve then?
Reading Moore’s paper (which is the reference of the marketing person who coined the term), Moore’s law isn’t just miniaturisation, it was also an observation that’s the economics would improve. ie that building N transistors is cheaper on the next smaller node than the previous.
And without the economics working, the shrinking would never have occurred at the rate it did for so long.
So yes, it getting bigger would be against the spirit of the law.