home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.parallel:2802 comp.arch:11895
- Newsgroups: comp.parallel,comp.arch
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!hubcap!fpst
- From: gottlieb@allan.ultra.nyu.edu (Allan Gottlieb)
- Subject: Re: BBN Monarch
- In-Reply-To: jkenton@world.std.com's message of Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:11:28 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Dec23.140915.21492@hubcap.clemson.edu>
- Sender: fpst@hubcap.clemson.edu (Steve Stevenson)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: allan.ultra.nyu.edu
- Organization: New York University, Ultracomputer project
- References: <1992Dec11.181240.23734@hubcap.clemson.edu>
- <1992Dec15.134558.7762@hubcap.clemson.edu>
- <1992Dec16.134859.20701@hubcap.clemson.edu>
- <1992Dec18.133247.10850@hubcap.clemson.edu>
- Date: 22 Dec 92 22:41:35
- Approved: parallel@hubcap.clemson.edu
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <1992Dec18.133247.10850@hubcap.clemson.edu> jkenton@world.std.com (Jeff Kenton) writes:
-
- gottlieb@allan.ultra.nyu.edu (Allan Gottlieb) writes:
-
- > If you mean the TC2000, we are still using ours.
-
- >No the Monarch was different. Bit serial network interface, MANY
- >processors. It was viewed as having a research component unlike the
- >TC2000, which was planned as a product. (The second sentence is
- >somewhat speculation on my part)
-
- The TC-2000 was a real product. We thought we did a good job on it, but
- it turned out to be difficult to find a market niche for.
-
- I think perhaps I wasn't clear. I know for sure the TC2000 was a real
- product. We have used one to test some coordination algorithms on a
- different (but similar) architecture from our own ultra. What I
- wasn't sure about was my assertion that monarch was viewed as having a
- large research component and not planned to lead directly to a product.
-
- [ Howdy Allan -- keep those puzzles coming! ]
-
- [Sure, providing readers like you keep the answers coming--A
- tech-review-theoretic comment]
-
-