Talk to some techies. Chip designers. I have. Several. And when I mention on-chip ring oscillator second/primary clocking mechanism (MMP), the first thing I get is a stupefied look. Then a response "that's how all chips have been designed for well over a decade" like I was stupid for not knowing that up front (and being high-end chip designers, they were addressing high speed chips). I ask about alternatives, and get techie-talk with the conclusion that there is no other way to crack that nut - that speed hurdle.

But don't believe me, make some inquiries of your own. And please advise if you hear something different.

Now, assuming what I've been told is correct, looking at ARM's products, how else to they get there from here?

I note mention of the '584. Yup, that was the only patent on which ARM interjected themselves in a litigation in which they were not directly involved. They were not a party to that suit. The new '584 is "untested". As for the rest of the MMP, we shall see.

As for Banosser's "where's the injunction against ARM"; have we seen any injunctions yet? Do we expect to? (I for one don't). And pressing for an injunction, ignoring the "rules" under which one may be issued, would probably not work out so well with many of the pertinent patents being involved in re-examination - validity at least minimally questionable.

Now, again, I strongly suggest you find some chip designers to talk to so that you might actually have a clue as to what you're talking about/criticizing.

Why in the world do you think I've maintained my gung-ho attitude about the MMP? Do you think that just maybe it has to do with two friends, EEs, one working at Intel (since 1976) and one at HP (now Agilent; since 1984/5)? Maybe other less close friends from when I lived/worked in Sunnyvale/Silicon Valley (1977-1984)? Maybe friends/contacts in the aerospace industry? Maybe just EEs/designers I just happened to meet (coincidentally, two of these were my best sources - actively engaged in high-end chip design). I've advised of these contacts, and what they had to say, in the (now distant) past.

BTW, I have learned in the last few years that many areospace companies produce specialized chips in-house for specific applications. Relatively high volume. I had been under the impression that such activity in that industry was rather rare (though my former employer did so as part of the "package" for infrared target detectors/sensors, space-based and airborne). So, for those that recall my advice re: broad use of patent indemnification clauses by that industry, those clauses only work when acquiring from a subcontractor. Thus, many aerospace/defense contractors ARE candidates as licensees for the MMP.

FWIW,

SGE