<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[Wow, does that remind you of the 8086 or what?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter S]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 11th 2006 12:07PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[I agree 8086 does come to mind.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Malcolm T]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 11th 2006 1:18PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[I have to zap the PRAM-a-looooooooooot!!!!!!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 11th 2006 12:40PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[The announced chips are 32 gigabits (Gb), not 32 gigabytes (GB). That's 4GB.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Ethan]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 11th 2006 12:58PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[Marty, Marty, We need to go back to the future!<br><br>Doc brown is involved I know it!!!<br><a href="http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/3738/historymp1.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/3738/historymp1.jpg</a><br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Tyler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 11th 2006 1:55PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[your right ethan, and that PRAM chip is 512Mbit, so its about 64Mbyte. or maybe we should say 64Mibyte?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[hobgoblin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 12th 2006 2:11AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[It's hard to beat NAND cell size, since the adjacent transistors overlap. But PRAM should be competitive with NOR flash, where each transistor is individually accessed.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[fc]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sep 18th 2006 11:01AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Samsung developing "PRAM" alternative to NAND flash memory]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/11/samsung-developing-pram-alternative-to-nand-flash-memory/</guid><description><![CDATA[How is...<br>1: Breakdown/Degradiation temperature, i.e. at which temperatures is the PRAM data reset or considered unreliable?<br>2: Error bits? NAND requires you to have some sort of error correction to be reliable where NOR does not, how aboute PRAM?<br>3: XIP-possebillities... Is tha data accessed by block addressing or byte addressing? Could one execute programs stored in PRAM or must it be loaded to f.x. SDRAM etc (XIP = eXecute In Place)]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[zainka]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Aug 17th 2007 2:40AM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
