The Economist - Technology Quarterly: After Moore’s Law 31min

The difference between the 4004 and the Skylake is the difference between computer behemoths that occupy whole basements and stylish little slabs 100,000 times more powerful that slip into a pocket. It is the difference between telephone systems operated circuit by circuit with bulky electromechanical switches and an internet that ceaselessly shuttles data packets around the world in their countless trillions. It is a difference that has changed everything from metal-bashing to foreign policy, from the booking of holidays to the designing of H-bombs. ... Moore’s law is not a law in the sense of, say, Newton’s laws of motion. But Intel, which has for decades been the leading maker of microprocessors, and the rest of the industry turned it into a self-fulfilling prophecy. ... That fulfilment was made possible largely because transistors have the unusual quality of getting better as they get smaller; a small transistor can be turned on and off with less power and at greater speeds than a larger one. ... “There’s a law about Moore’s law,” jokes Peter Lee, a vice-president at Microsoft Research: “The number of people predicting the death of Moore’s law doubles every two years.” ... making transistors smaller has no longer been making them more energy-efficient; as a result, the operating speed of high-end chips has been on a plateau since the mid-2000s ... while the benefits of making things smaller have been decreasing, the costs have been rising. This is in large part because the components are approaching a fundamental limit of smallness: the atom. ... One idea is to harness quantum mechanics to perform certain calculations much faster than any classical computer could ever hope to do. Another is to emulate biological brains, which perform impressive feats using very little energy. Yet another is to diffuse computer power rather than concentrating it, spreading the ability to calculate and communicate across an ever greater range of everyday objects in the nascent internet of things. ... in 2012 the record for maintaining a quantum superposition without the use of silicon stood at two seconds; by last year it had risen to six hours. ... For a quantum algorithm to work, the machine must be manipulated in such a way that the probability of obtaining the right answer is continually reinforced while the chances of getting a wrong answer are suppressed.

Screen shot 2016 11 22 at 9.22.58 am
IEEE Spectrum - The Surprising Story of the First Microprocessors 10min

Engineers recognized that the increasing density of MOS transistors would eventually allow a complete computer processor to be put on a single chip. But because MOS transistors were slower than bipolar ones, a computer based on MOS chips made sense only when relatively low performance was required or when the apparatus had to be small and lightweight—such as for data terminals, calculators, or avionics. So those were the kinds of computing applications that ushered in the microprocessor revolution. ... Most engineers today are under the impression that the start of that revolution began in 1971 with Intel’s 4-bit 4004 and was immediately and logically followed by the company’s 8-bit 8008 chip. In fact, the story of the birth of the microprocessor is far richer and more surprising. In particular, some newly uncovered documents illuminate how a long-forgotten chip—Texas Instruments’ TMX 1795—beat the Intel 8008 to become the first 8-bit microprocessor, only to slip into obscurity.

The Guardian - Vanishing point: the rise of the invisible computer 9min

Everyone knows that modern computers are better than old ones. But it is hard to convey just how much better, for no other consumer technology has improved at anything approaching a similar pace. The standard analogy is with cars: if the car from 1971 had improved at the same rate as computer chips, then by 2015 new models would have had top speeds of about 420 million miles per hour. ... There have been roughly 22 ticks of Moore’s law since the launch of the 4004 in 1971 through to mid-2016. For the law to hold until 2050 means there will have to be 17 more, in which case those engineers would have to figure out how to build computers from components smaller than an atom of hydrogen, the smallest element there is. ... a consensus among Silicon Valley’s experts that Moore’s law is near its end.