Rickface: But for Silicon Photonics how is it different and why do you have to redevelop for every AOC?
Please re-read my post, rickface. I said "manufacturing costs", and I did so for a reason. It should be obvious that development costs are one-time costs only, while manufacturing costs are not.
The reason for POET to be much cheaper on the manufacturing side is that the POET laser is monolithically integrated, while any SI Photonics' laser is not. To recycle the Suresh quote, but highlighting different words:
- And really the fourth distinguishing feature again comes about by this integrated capability of the POET platform. Since all the components of the POET platform are in the optical engine integrated, our cost, if you will, tend not to scale linearly with the number of channels, like a typical AOC does. So the cost benefits which we believe are already significant for a single channel, multiplies for multi-channel configurations.
