[comp.sys.transputer] Parsytec again...

K312240%AEARN@CORNELLC.CIT.CORNELL.EDU (Klaus Kusche) (03/09/90)

Dear Mailing List:

As someone from Parsytec responded to my emails about Parsytec, some
explanations and comments are to be made:

1.) It's true, I'm *not* a user of Parsytec hardware or software, *but*
I seriously considered going with Parsytec in the past.

First of all, we wanted to use Parsytec's PS/2 boards as masters
for our Inmos-compatible transputer box. I asked a very precise
question if this is possible, and as described in my previous mail, in
spite of many Faxes and phone calls it took them more than one month
to come up with a useful answer, which seriously delayed our projects.

Don't blame it on the Austrian dealer - he was very helpful, but unable
to obtain any more info's from them than I did.

Secondly, for more than two years now, I tried to get info's about their
Lisp and Prolog projects. In the past, response was zero, no matter if
I tried by phone, Fax or smail. They didn't even say 'there is no such
project' or 'that's a secret'. After a phone call three weeks ago, I
received a single report about their Prolog.

I still consider buying their Prolog, but again, up to now I was
unable to obtain a definite statement from them telling me:
* If they sell it to people not using their hardware.
* If it will run on such hardware.
* What are the requirements.
* What is the price.
Again, the dealer was unable to have these questions answered, too.

Summary: I don't know how they support their users, but speaking as
a non-user, my experiences are not very promising.

2.) I did never say that Parsytec products are bad:
* They have a very wide product range.
* They have very high mechanical and electrical quality.
* They have done a lot for the development of Helios.

3.) The Parsytec representative and I seem to have a very different
point of view:

He is mainly talking about parallel supercomputing, and about systems
for specific applications or application software development, where
people want to use a single or a few important software environments
with minimum trouble and maximum safety.

I'm talking about research and education, not about multi-user
supercomputing. Here the main goal is to be able to try almost every
piece of software developed for transputers:
* There are four parallel Prologs available for transputers? - Ok,
  I want to try and compare them all!
* Trollius and GNU C for transputers? Fine, I want to have a copy!
* and so on....
Here, experiences show that:
* There is the widest software range for PC's with Inmos-compatibles.
* The PC versions usually become available several months prior to any
  other versions of the same software.
* The PC versions are by far cheapest and easiest to get.
* The PC versions show minimum troubles with respect to distribution
  medium or host hardware/software dependencies.
* It is easiest to port servers and device drivers to the PC/DOS
  environment, and it doesn't require any modifications to the
  host operating system (have you ever tried to install device
  drivers for a dozen different pieces of transputer software in a
  single Unix kernel?)

This is not only true for software products, but also for exchanging
research software with other academic institutions.

This is why I absolutely insist on binary compatibility down to the
hardware level!

I didn't say that the Inmos hardware standards are best (definitely
not), but they are most widespread and easiest to live with.

We don't need a a fool-proof, highly sophisticated multiuser system,
we need a system dedicated to a single user which is able to run as
many different software systems as possible, one after another,
with minimum trouble. For us, the most useful reset scheme is a
global big red button: It gurantees minimum inference with any
software (and Inmos comes closest to that).

Similarely, I didn't say that DOS is the best or most comfortable
environment for working with transputers, just the one best suited
to our needs. Sun is better, Apple is better, but both are by far not as
universal with respect to transputers (and DOS isn't that bad).

Moreover, you can always run Unix on your PC, and execute your transpute
applications from the DOS emulator, or port the servers.

4.) About Helios: We are a non-Helios site, and this will not change
in the near future. Helios is very good for providing a standard
environment, for using ready-to-run applications, and for hiding and
simplifying parallelism as much as possible. But for research and
education in parallel computing, I need exactly the opposite:
* Complete knowledge about and control of what is going on in
  hardware and software, absolutely reproducible timings, process
  placements etc.
* A simple, consistent, formally well based model of parallelism and
  communication (like Occam), which is also efficient for medium to
  fine grain programs. The pipes in Helios are too high-level, too
  coarse-grain, and too slow, and parallelism and communication using
  Helios system calls is by far to complicated and unintuitive.
Helios definitely has its place in the transputer world, but not in our
institute.

Besides, currently perhaps 25 % of all transputer software packages have
been ported to Helios, and this number is increasing quite slowly.
This is definitely not enough for us to accept Helios as the one and
only standard for transputers.

I hope this provides better understanding of what I've said before
(again, everything is my strictly private opinion).

By the way, could we hear the opinions of some Parsytec users about
the discussion going on here? (Dealers are welcome, too, but please
clearly indicate your status!)

Greetings

************************************************************************
* Klaus Kusche                                                         *
* Research Institute for Symbolic Computation                          *
* Johannes Kepler University           Tel: +43 7236 3231 67           *
* A-4040 Linz                          Telex: (Austria) 22323 uni li a *
* Austria (Europe)                     Fax: +43 7236 3231 30           *
*                                                                      *
* Bitnet:           K312240@AEARN                                      *
* Arpa/CS/Internet: K312240%AEARN.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU               *
* UUCP:             mcvax!aearn.bitnet!K312240                         *
* Janet:            k312240@earn.aearn or k312240%aearn@earn-relay     *
************************************************************************