mark@mips.com (Mark G. Johnson) (03/08/91)
In article <45252@ut-emx.uucp>, guru@ut-emx.uucp (chen liehgong) writes: > > Why were the CDC 6600 and the TI ASC (Advanced Scientific Computer) > failures? I would like to have your opinions on this. > > -r.guru prasadh > (guru@emx.utexas.edu) Presumably this is a class assignment to look into early vector machines; in which case it would be the CDC STAR-100 (not the 6600) that ought to be considered. As many many other posters have stated, the 6600 was a resounding success (ask Bob Tomasulo :-). The ASC and the STAR-100 were vector machines, the 6600 wasn't. The ASC and the STAR-100 were failures, the 6600 wasn't. Bell and Newell would be the first place to look. -- -- Mark Johnson MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques M/S 2-02, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 (408) 524-8308 mark@mips.com {or ...!decwrl!mips!mark}