Hi Andrea,

I haven't posted in a while, and I am tech ignorant - but have been invested in the company for over three years and attended the AGM in 2011 - when the chip was displayed. In answer to your 4 points. If I read the articles correctly - this new technology extends Moore's law without need for the optical component . In other words the issues of speed, power consumption and heat generation are addressed in a diffrent way. Your third point is specifically refuted in the article I referenced to Faircj in my last post.

While I agree with your last point, as far as I know the BAE validation of commercial scale production - which was supposed to occur only months after the 2011 AGM - has still not occured. A long while back Faircj informed me it was a problem with "annealment" - and the last time I asked I believe Ogee conceded it still had not occured. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. I would suspect that this is one of the reasons for resetting the final milestone and the detour into PET.

While the competing technology may be a few years behind POET, it seems to be closing fast and we have still not demonstrated commercial viability (as opposed to great progress in the research lab). If indeed Stanford has discovered an easy way to produce these nanotubes with a zero error rate - I see that as significant- especially since they claim they can use all of Intel's existing equiptment for fabrication.