andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) (02/10/88)
[]
"the model number, as well as the "marketing mips" gets stamped
on only at the end."
Strange. Around here, the "marketing mips" get stamped on before the
engineering starts.
-=- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!tekecs!andrew) [UUCP]
(andrew%tekecs.tek.com@relay.cs.net) [ARPA]leech@unc.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech) (02/10/88)
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:
In article <9741@tekecs.TEK.COM> andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes:
$ "the model number, as well as the "marketing mips" gets stamped
$ on only at the end."
$Strange. Around here, the "marketing mips" get stamped on before the
$engineering starts.
What happens when serendipity strikes and the real mips exceed
the marketing claims? Are all your ads rewritten? (.5 :-)
Jon Leech (leech@cs.unc.edu) __@/
``After all, the best part of a holiday is perhaps not so much to be
resting yourself as to see all the other fellows busy working.''
- Kenneth Grahame, _The Wind in the Willows_blarson@skat.usc.edu (Bob Larson) (02/10/88)
In article <1110@thorin.cs.unc.edu> leech@unc.UUCP (Jonathan Leech) writes: >In article <9741@tekecs.TEK.COM> andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes: [prior reference is missing] >$ "the model number, as well as the "marketing mips" gets stamped >$ on only at the end." >$Strange. Around here, the "marketing mips" get stamped on before the >$engineering starts. > What happens when serendipity strikes and the real mips exceed >the marketing claims? Are all your ads rewritten? (.5 :-) Unless it's the top end machine, you add some no-ops to your microcode. (You obvious don't want to affect the sales of your top end machine.) :-) except some companies are rumored to do this :-) [I don't realy mean to imply that tektronix is one of them.] -- Bob Larson Arpa: Blarson@Ecla.Usc.Edu blarson@skat.usc.edu Uucp: {sdcrdcf,cit-vax}!oberon!skat!blarson Prime mailing list: info-prime-request%fns1@ecla.usc.edu oberon!fns1!info-prime-request
elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (02/11/88)
in article <1110@thorin.cs.unc.edu>, leech@unc.cs.unc.edu (Jonathan Leech) says: > In article <9741@tekecs.TEK.COM> andrew@frip.gwd.tek.com (Andrew Klossner) writes: > $ "the model number, as well as the "marketing mips" gets stamped > $ on only at the end." > $Strange. Around here, the "marketing mips" get stamped on before the > $engineering starts. > What happens when serendipity strikes and the real mips exceed > the marketing claims? Are all your ads rewritten? (.5 :-) I dunno about there, but around here, you'd hear: "It's too fancy. It's too expensive. It exceeds specs. Make it cheaper and slower." Most of the time, that's the right thing to do too, alas to we techweenies... like somebody at Commodore said about a rumored 68020-based workstation, "who would buy a $6,000 computer from Commodore?" (instead, they introduced a lower-performance 68020 plug-in card for their $2,000 machine -- but that doesn't rule out the workstation, of course, if they can ever find a marketing niche for it). -- Eric Lee Green elg@usl.CSNET Asimov Cocktail,n., A verbal bomb {cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg detonated by the mention of any Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 subject, resulting in an explosion Lafayette, LA 70509 of at least 5,000 words.
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (02/19/88)
> What happens when serendipity strikes and the real mips exceed > the marketing claims? Are all your ads rewritten? (.5 :-) No, you slow the thing down to match the ads, then introduce the full-speed version later as an upgrade at extra cost! (Or maybe just quietly bury the full-speed version if it interferes with your marketing plans -- there are persistent rumors that the original fast version of DEC's wretched PDP11/60 never saw the light of day.) -- Those who do not understand Unix are | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology condemned to reinvent it, poorly. | {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,utai}!utzoo!henry
thompson@dalcs.UUCP (Michael A. Thompson) (02/19/88)
In article <1988Feb18.175121.16125@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >No, you slow the thing down to match the ads, then introduce the full-speed >version later as an upgrade at extra cost! (Or maybe just quietly bury the >full-speed version if it interferes with your marketing plans -- there are >persistent rumors that the original fast version of DEC's wretched PDP11/60 >never saw the light of day.) I heard about the CDC upgrade for their Cyber 6600 (I think) that doubled the speed and cost on the order of $10000, and consisted of cutting a couple of jumpers and removing a chip. ( I can see the itemized bill now -- $10000 for knowing which chip to remove :-) -- Michael A. Thompson, Dept. Math, Stats, & C.S., Dalhousie U., Halifax, N.S. thompson@dalcs.uucp From Bitnet or Uucp thompson@cs.dal.cdn From Bitnet or Cdn thompson%dalcs.uucp@uunet.uu.net From Arpa
paul@unisoft.UUCP (n) (02/23/88)
In article <2780@dalcs.UUCP> thompson@dalcs.UUCP (Michael A. Thompson) writes: > I heard about the CDC upgrade for their Cyber 6600 (I think) >that doubled the speed and cost on the order of $10000, and consisted >of cutting a couple of jumpers and removing a chip. ( I can see the itemized >bill now -- $10000 for knowing which chip to remove :-) Yes - our Burroughs 6700 once had what was locally known as the '$8000 screwdriver' (depends on your idea of who was being screwed ...) where the field support people came in and tweeked a switch in the back to bump the clock rate - we made sure that we had a performance clause in the contract which turned out great when they discovered that the system had been installed with the high speed turned on by mistake 3 years before, when we didn't get N% better performance we got our money back ..... Paul -- (C) Copyright Paul Campbell, you only may redistribute if your recipients can. E-mail: ..!{ucbvax,hoptoad}!unisoft!paul Nothing here represents the opinions of UniSoft or its employees (except me) "Nuclear war doesn't prove who's Right, just who's Left" (ABC news 10/13/87)
davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) (02/23/88)
In article <2780@dalcs.UUCP> thompson@dalcs.UUCP (Michael A. Thompson) writes: | [...] | I heard about the CDC upgrade for their Cyber 6600 (I think) | that doubled the speed and cost on the order of $10000, and consisted | of cutting a couple of jumpers and removing a chip. ( I can see the itemized | bill now -- $10000 for knowing which chip to remove :-) As I recall there was once a system from Heneywell which was billed as a "timesharing" machine. It would run batch, but slowly. It was quite a bit cheaper than the general purpose machine. In the dispatcher was an instruction which set the priority of batch jobs lower on that model. Addition of a single NOP would perform an upgrade, at a cost of thousands of dollars. Perhaps someone can remembers the model numbers involved. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
kenny@uiucdcsb.cs.uiuc.edu (02/25/88)
/* Written 9:43 am Feb 23, 1988 by davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP in uiucdcsb:comp.arch */ As I recall there was once a system from Heneywell which was billed as a "timesharing" machine. It would run batch, but slowly. It was quite a bit cheaper than the general purpose machine. In the dispatcher was an instruction which set the priority of batch jobs lower on that model. Addition of a single NOP would perform an upgrade, at a cost of thousands of dollars. /* End of text from uiucdcsb:comp.arch */ It was the 66/07, 66/17 and 66/27 (There could have been a /37, but wasn't.) It didn't finagle the job priorities, but rather it disabled cache memory when going to non-timesharing programs (batch or transaction-processing). The NOP *could* be patched in, but the dispatcher initialization code would put it in for you if you were on the right sort of box -- a change the field engineer could make by clipping one diode and causing a bit to appear in the configuration status word. Oh, yes, and what is `Heneywell?' A melange of General Electric and Honeywell (I preferred General Honey myself -- what's it now, General Nippon Honey? Anyone got a better handle?)
haynes@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (99700000) (02/26/88)
And then there was the predecessor GE 625/635 line which originally was to have been built with 2usec memory for the 625 and much more expensive 1usec memory for the 635. But by the time the machine really started selling the cost of 1usec memory had come down and 2usec memory was essentially obsolete. So in the interests of standardization they were all built with 1usec memory and the 625s had a time delay to slow it down to 2usec. These machines were followed by a 615 which had quite a number of internal timers juggled to slow it down specifically to compete with the IBM 360/50. At least Amdahl was completely out in the open with their models where you could throw a switch and turn the overlap off and pay less, or turn it on when you wanted more speed and were willing to pay more. Such is the way of marketing-driven business. Seems like DEC used to be technology-driven rather than marketing-driven, but that lately they have changed to marketing orientation also - there was the Microvax that sold for a reduced price and had epoxy poured into some of the backpanel slots so you couldn't expand it. haynes@ucscc.ucsc.edu haynes@ucscc.bitnet ..ucbvax!ucscc!haynes