TEXAS INSTRUMENTS' Electronic Mail message # 198017

Thread View: comp.sys.transputer

2 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

2 total messages Started by Mitchell Reifel Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:50

#664

Author: Mitchell Reifel
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:50

41 lines
2170 bytes

-----------------------------
Application message id:  TI.msg.198017
Grade of Delivery:  Normal

-----------------------------

In a previous article Stephen Doyle of Inmos writes:

> Your statement on Texas is inaccurate. It is a credit to the transputer
> (and perhaps a reflection on Texas' offerings) that there have not
> been design-in losses to Texas.

I have to disagree.  The number of customers who have switched from the T9000
to the C40 is quite considerable.  The number of units to date numbers in the
tens of thousands with revenue worth millions of dollars.

Also, the number of "third party" vendors who have included C40 support with
their Transputer support (3L, Perihelion, etc.) numbers over two dozen. Since
these companies position their products where the revenue is, it is a good
market indicator for the C40.

> There is still only one real transputer family and randomly sticking links on
> a processor does not make it a contender. An interpretation of the situation
> could be that even a (previously) absent T9000 is considered better than a
> real C30/C40.

Some people out there would agree with your opinion.  Others don't.  The market
will eventually decide.  I think the outcome will be that both products will
find their niche in the market.  Users will choose different options for
different reasons.  In some cases the two will be competing for the same
socket.  In others, the two processors will complement each other (there are
already a number of designs employing both). The main outcome, however, is that
the Transputer no longer has a monopoly in this market.

Regards,
Mitch Reifel
TMS320C40 Program Manager
Texas Instruments, Houston, Texas
5140840@mcimail.com

Re: TEXAS INSTRUMENTS' Electronic Mail message # 198017

#665

Author: David Hucaby
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:32

37 lines
2076 bytes

In article <22920818175022.0004006329D40X4@mcimail.com>, 
(Mitchell Reifel) writes:
|> -----------------------------
|>  
|> Also, the number of "third party" vendors who have included C40 support with
|> their Transputer support (3L, Perihelion, etc.) numbers over two dozen. Since
|> these companies position their products where the revenue is, it is a good
|> market indicator for the C40.
|>  
|> (stuff deleted)
|>
|> Regards,
|> Mitch Reifel
|> TMS320C40 Program Manager
|> Texas Instruments, Houston, Texas
|> 5140840@mcimail.com
|>  
|>  

Is there a list of current vendors who are offering support (hardware
and software) for the C40? I've been trying to follow what's available
for it since it was first announced, but haven't seen that much 
advertising done. 

I have a new (Transtech) transputer-based system here, 
and would like to think about mixing in C40's in the future. 
However, I don't know how various vendors are making this feasible. 
Does TI have any info on its third-party supporters that would be mailable,
or should one contact individual vendors first?

      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
David Hucaby       hucaby@mri.uky.edu   | "There is no finer thing a machine 
                                        |    can do than to give his last 
Univ. of Kentucky MRI Center            |    transistor for his friends or 
106 MRI Building, 800 Rose Street       |              township."
Lexington, Kentucky 40536-0098          | 
(606) 258-4307     Fax: (606) 258-1068  |  Don Knotts in "How to Frame a Figg"

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads