andy@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Pfiffer) (11/09/87)
I recently made a posting in comp.arch with regards to the FPS T-Series. The discussion first evolved from rumors about the demise of the T-Series. Well, we've heard from FPS directly, and we can state: o FPS does have T-Series machines in-house for development (we had heard otherwise). o FPS does have potential buyers for the T-Series line. (I had heard of their research grants and apparently misinterpreted this and a few other snippets of information) o FPS has not stopped production on the system. I find that to be good news. Great news, in fact. We here at Cornell *want* FPS to be succesful. We've put a lot of time and effort into our T-Series, and would hate to see the machine (and FPS) disappear. Natrually, we would like our software to be successful as well. We happen to think the two make an impressive pair. (We're anxious to try things out on the T-200 at Los Alamos) The machine as a whole has a lot of potential (and their next generation machine even more). We're trying to uncork that and let some of the "brainy-types" around here get some real science done. If we had anything at all to do with it, we'd like the machine to become the greatest thing since sliced bread. So much for rumors... Standing corrected, Andy
pcm@ogcvax.UUCP (Phil Miller) (11/14/87)
>From: andy@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Andy Pfiffer) >Newsgroups: comp.arch >Subject: Re: FPS T-Series > >I recently made a posting in comp.arch with regards to the FPS T-Series. >The discussion first evolved from rumors about the demise of the T-Series. > >Well, we've heard from FPS directly, and we can state: > o FPS does have T-Series machines in-house for development > o FPS does have potential buyers for the T-Series line. > o FPS has not stopped production on the system. > >I find that to be good news. Great news, in fact. We here at Cornell >*want* FPS to be succesful. We've put a lot of time and effort into our >T-Series, and would hate to see the machine (and FPS) disappear. Natrually, >we would like our software to be successful as well. We happen to think >the two make an impressive pair. > >If we had anything at all to do with it, we'd like the machine to >become the greatest thing since sliced bread. Thank you very much for your correction. We at FPS are working very hard to make the T-series and our other products a success. I'm glad to reinforce your statements by commenting that rumors of our demise are premature. I find the notion of a Un*x-style operating system running on an n-cube architecture to be a very good idea, and I await news of your results with a great deal of interest. Perhaps when you complete your work, you will consider coming to Beaverton, Oregon, to give a presentation of the more interesting aspects of your work. Given that Beaverton is the home of Intel's iPSC, the Sequent Balance and Symmetry products, the NCube, Inc. machine, the Verdix corporation (Ada compiler folks), and QTC (software consultants), there is considerable interest in parallel processing here. Please keep us posted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phil Miller | For once, it seems especially appropriate to point Oregon Graduate Center | out that my opinions do not necessarily represent pcm@ogcvax | those of my employer or those of the university | I attend.