🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.arch
Article #2821

Re: 64Kb RAMs cannot be done with optical processes

#2821
From: Roger Shepherd
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 1989 08:56
37 lines
2529 bytes
In article <1989Oct24.215942.7756@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
>
>Several people have expressed interest in this goodie, so herewith some
>details.  The paper is from IEEE Compcon Spring 1977, titled "Prospects
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>for the 64K RAM - an outline of the problem", by Paul R. Schroeder of
>Mostek.
> ...
>His conclusion is that 64Kb RAMs will experience long development delay
                                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>and a 32Kb RAM is probably viable as an intermediate stage.
>
>Commercial 64Kb RAMs were announced at about the same time as the paper
>was published, and were available a few months later.

Paul Schroeder was one of the founders of Inmos and I joined INMOS in
1979 and I remember the 64k DRAM saga. Fact is, Schroeder was basically
correct. I can't remember when the first parts were announced but when
I joined INMOS in September 1979 there was a pile of publicity about
INMOS being doomed because it had ALREADY missed the 64k DRAM boat.
However, the fact was that at that time 64k DRAMs were not really
available and working, I seem to recall that it was '81 or '82 until
they were really around.  (Incidentally, a similar thing happened with 
16k SRAMs, except this time INMOS actually got to market with things
very quickly and it was a long time before any competition appear.
Again, Intel had announced and `introduced' their 16 SRAM, but I recall
it being withdrawn soon after the INMOS SRAM was introduced).



 


Roger Shepherd, INMOS Ltd   JANET:    roger@uk.co.inmos 
1000 Aztec West             UUCP:     ukc!inmos!roger or uunet!inmos-c!roger
Almondsbury                 INTERNET: roger@inmos.com
+44 454 616616              ROW:      roger@inmos.com OR roger@inmos.co.uk
Technical Details
Message-ID: <2656@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!inmos!roger
References: <6797@hubcap.clemson.edu> <1989Oct17.154651.16073@utzoo.uucp> <1T9NpG#464lr4=eric@snark.uu.net> <1989Oct19.163734.20976@utzoo.uucp> <1989Oct24.215942.7756@utzoo.uucp>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!mcsun!ukc!inmos!roger
From: roger@wraxall.inmos.co.uk (Roger Shepherd)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: 64Kb RAMs cannot be done with optical processes
Message-ID: <2656@ganymede.inmos.co.uk>
Date: 25 Oct 89 08:56:55 GMT
References: <6797@hubcap.clemson.edu> <1989Oct17.154651.16073@utzoo.uucp> <1T9NpG#464lr4=eric@snark.uu.net> <1989Oct19.163734.20976@utzoo.uucp> <1989Oct24.215942.7756@utzoo.uucp>
Sender: news@inmos.co.uk
Reply-To: roger@inmos.co.uk (Roger Shepherd)
Organization: INMOS Limited, Bristol, UK.
Lines: 37