mark@hubcap.clemson.edu (Mark Smotherman) (02/08/91)
From article <90@shasta.Stanford.EDU>, by jackk@shasta.Stanford.EDU (jackk): > ----- > I read in a recent EE Times article that there are no working chips > yet for the R4000. This type of pre-announcement is disturbingly > reminiscent of IBM's "pre-announcement" of the 360/95 before > there were even lab prototypes running. If I recall correctly, > some of their competitors took legal action against them. To this day, > such "pre-announcements" from IBM cause competitors to accuse them > of creating "fear, uncertainty, and doubt" in the marketplace to > freeze out competition, yet we hear no such accusations against > MIPS. Is it simply a matter of size ? If I read the history books right, 0) IBM announced the model 92 in Aug. 1964, then withdrew it in 1Q 1965. The model 91 was announced in Nov. 1964, and shipped in 4Q 1967. The model 92 was withdrawn and replaced by the model 95 in 1Q 1968. (The S/360 line was announced April 7, 1964, for comparison.) 1) The IBM pre-announcement of the model 92 came after IBM lost several choice national lab accounts to the CDC-6600 (and apparently just prior to the first delivery of a CDC-6600). The lease prices offered by IBM for the model 92 undercut the CDC prices, and CDC was forced to cut their prices. Thus the pre-announcements were viewed by some as acts of desperation. (Didn't it happen after Watson's "janitor's memo"?) 2) IBM was also perceived as non-innovative with (at least) its lack of quality time-sharing. (They did launch the model 67 and TSS against the GE/Honeywell MULTICS machine in Aug. 1965 and, though they lost the MIT account, shipped the first model 67 in 2Q 1966.) 3) IBM's track record in the 1960's suffered from late delivery and scalebacks of (at least) their OS/360. 4) It also occurred in an era in which salesmen from lots of companies apparently promised the moon and later could not live up to their promises. In terms of any lack of criticism against MIPS -- from my perspective, MIPS the co. is neither desperate nor non-innovative. I also think that their track record is enviable. I think credibility, and a perception of their good will, explain any lack of criticism. In terms of the IBM machines, it would be good to hear from those who witnessed the events. *** Followups to alt.folklore.computers please. *** -- Mark Smotherman, Comp. Sci. Dept., Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634 INTERNET: mark@hubcap.clemson.edu UUCP: gatech!hubcap!mark
gillies@cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) (02/09/91)
Can we assume that R4000 pre-announcement comes because MIPS is losing mark share, or is not having a good quarter / half year? When your stock goes down or your sales go down, sometimes it takes some boasting to get things turned around... Don Gillies | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign gillies@cs.uiuc.edu | Digital Computer Lab, 1304 W. Springfield, Urbana IL ---------------------+------------------------------------------------------ "UGH! WAR! ... What is it GOOD FOR? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!" - the song "WAR" by Edwin Starr, circa 1965 --