I couldn't resist jumping in... Firstly, what do you mean by MEMS? Microlithography through photolithography, or "micro-electro-mechanical systems" - the latter being somewhat of a specialty to make devices such at TI's DLP, where the technology is a venue for niche applications. To answer your question Atul - it's about cost AND marketing. If you can do it cheaper using tools that do not employ photolithography, awesome! If you venture into uncharted territory using an unconventional technology, e.g. "MEMS", to make an improvement, especially if slight, over something which might already exist, hire a kick-butt marketing person and ensure strong financial backing. Philip D. Floyd wrote: > Great question > > Others can no doubt answer this in more detail, but here are something to > think about: > > Think of MEMS as an *enabling* technology. > > > The goal isn't necessarily to make large things in a small form per se. > What is important is that a 'thing' in a smaller form can enable new > functionality either unobtainable or just not imaginable. > > An analogy (though not a great one) is the evolution of microelectronics. > Had you asked your question in 1953, as opposed to 2003, you might have > asked "why do you need to shrink electronics?" > > Given that in its form at that time (vacuum tubes, large discrete caps, > resistors, diodes ect) everything seemed to work just fine. However, the > shrinking and *reduction in cost* of electronics has allowed for the use > electronics everywhere, improving products (better function, reliability, > cost ) and industrial productivity. Additionally, shrinking of electronics > has enabled creation of cheap general purpose computers, sophisticated > software and all the results you see around you now. > > It's not just the shrinking of the devices that is important, it is the fact > that they are smaller, and can be made in large numbers *at low cost*. > > Will the same thing happen with MEMS. Yes, to some extent. There are many > differences between the microelectronics and MEMS which will make the impact > of MEMS on other technologies different than the impact of microelectronics. > I'll let someone else talk about that. > > Places to find out more about MEMS > > http://www.bell-labs.com/org/physicalsciences/projects/mems/mems.html > > http://mems.colorado.edu/c1.res.ppt/ppt/g.tutorial/ppt.htm > > http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.01/mems.html > http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~mems/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Atul Ranade [mailto:atulvranade@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 10:18 AM > To: mems-talk@memsnet.org > Subject: [mems-talk] Why MEMS? > > Hi all, > I am a new member of this group. My name is Atul and I am a graduate student > at University of Texas at El Paso. Could anyone please tell me the necessity > of miniaturizing parts which already exist? Re-phrasing my question I am not > clear about the reason for existence of MEMS. > Thanks for your time and looking forward to someone replying. > Atul. -- Raj Gupta, Director Nanotechnology & MEMS Consulting 33 Vandewater Street Suite 205 San Francisco, CA 94133-1967 OFF: +1 415 362 3694 FAX: +1 253 563 1815 Website: http://www.mindspring.com/~gupta