LRCX
#Yes is the answer to that.
But I think that's a headline on the intensity of etch from a conversion point of view.
It's a very favorable transition for us.
It's a commentary on the patterning transition in etch and deposition, both.
We believe that the total wafer fabrication equipment investment in DRAM is slightly higher than we thought.
We believe it's more efficient to my earlier point, and we believe it should favor the segments of deposition and etch.
I'm not sure I understood the first part of your question.
The first part of the question was, is 3D shipments are they happening now.
Or are they happening on a continuing basis.
There's always someone somewhere buying something for a 3D NAND application.
So sometimes that's an addition to an HVM capability, sometimes that's a first phase pilot, sometimes it's second phase.
These four guys have different timing, and different commitments to investment, but I think everybody's there as an industry.
We have two more guys we're going to try to get to here, so can we go to the next question, please.
As I said before, at least in the dialogues we have with the customer, we're not really distinguishing too much between 20-nanometer, 16-nanometer, and 14-nanometer.
There's a huge amount of overlap in terms of equipment.
The basic message today, we think, is the one that was communicated to you publicly in the last couple of weeks, that there's commitment to technology conversions.
And a little bit less today at the 14-nanometer, 16-nanometer node for the year, from an industry perspective, than was originally anticipated, but I think that the basic commitment to a FinFET conversion, first wave, and then the pilot investments in 10-nanometer are there.
So that would be my comments on foundry.
And we are assuming by the end of this year, that the capacity that has been shipped in at or less than 20-nanometer is in the range of 200,000 to 210,000 wafer starts per month.
Yes.
Which is a disclosure by the way we made at SEMICON West a year ago, so I was really just repeating that based on our assessment of critical and non-critical applications in that segment, we think the 90% headline that we communicated at SEMICON West is valid today.
And in fact, as I said, in my prepared comments, we had a nice reinforcement of that in a selection this quarter.
We don't actually make that disclosure.
No.
I would say it's a very constant competitive threat.
And I don't think it's anything new.
The reason, by the way I said we don't disclose it is because the value of the critical position is much less to do with the percentage of the business, and it's a reasonable percentage.
Otherwise I wouldn't bother telling you.
The value proposition of the critical wins is, you create a cycles of learning for your Company that your competition does not have.
And if you do that for long enough, then your ability to be successful, broadly in a marketplace, is greater than theirs.
So it's value is not the percentage.
The value is learning and the critical feature capability that we develop broadly in the marketplace.
