🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <1992Nov26.015031.29333@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, senseman@ricky.brainlab.utsa.edu (David M. Senseman) writes:
> 
> I agree with everything Thomas Sippel said and only want to add one point.
> More and more, high performance computing is graphical computing. This is
> certainly true in Biology and I expect in Chemical Physics as well.
> 
> If you look at Dec, Sun, and IBM, their graphics strategy has been 
> pretty uninspired. As an old PDP-11 user, I have tremendous respect for
> Ken Olsen -- but let's face it, if there ever was a "left-brained" 
> person, it was Ken. Dec never had a coherent graphics vision and as far I
> can see, it still doesn't. Sun is just as bad -- witness the TACC-1, 
> the incompatible TACC-2, and the lastest in the line, the incompatible
> Freedom 3000 (Evans&Sutherland add on board). And IBM? As someone
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> who still owns an IBM PC/RT, don't get me started...
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> -- 
> David M. Senseman, Ph.D.     | A man who has never gone to school may steal 
> (senseman@lonestar.utsa.edu) | from a freight car; but if he has a university
> Division of Life Sciences    | education, he may steal the whole railroad.
> UT San Antonio               |             Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919)

Excuse me but I'd like to get you (and anyone else) started.

Firstly, on the RS/6000's a large amount of the graphics hardware and software
is licenced from SGI, so what's the big problem with IBM's graphics?

Secondly, I am looking at doing computational chemistry on an RS/6000 and I'd
like to see you (or anyone else) try to talk me out of it (or support it).

	ajax

Adrian.Lewis@iasos.utas.edu.au

PS   Sorry about the cross-posts, but I don't know where this thread first
     started.

PPS  Please attack via email.