Xref: utzoo comp.lsi:1133 comp.lsi.cad:570 sci.electronics:13360
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!amdcad!brahms!phil
From: phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: comp.lsi,comp.lsi.cad,sci.electronics
Subject: Re: no PALASM90 on workstations
Keywords: PAL PALASM AMD
Message-ID: <1990Aug6.004614.24315@amd.com>
Date: 6 Aug 90 00:46:14 GMT
References: <833@hls0.hls.oz> <1990Aug5.070528.4522@amd.com> <1990Aug5.161336.18508@ameristar>
Sender: usenet@amd.com (NNTP Posting)
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc; Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 77

In article <1990Aug5.161336.18508@ameristar>
rick@ameristar (Rick Spanbauer) writes:
|	Gee, Phil, usually you can be counted on for rational postings ;-) ;-)

Well, you wouldn't want to be too conventional, would you? :-)

|	Let's try this: you've (AMD) focused on a particular instance

You probably don't mean it this way but I have to be sure the readers
here all understand.

I AM NOT SPEAKING FOR AMD. THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION. I'M NOT EVEN WORKING
FOR AMD RIGHT NOW.

|	of PC technology, ie PC running MS-DOS, presumably going directly
|	to the screen (ega/vga?).  You could have chosen MS-DOS + Windows/3.0,
|	MS-DOS + Desqview/X, or run under OS/2, QNX, etc.  Let's remap

Sure, but why? DOS with a monochrome monitor works just fine and is
nice and cheap. The choices you listed only limit the number of platforms,
and increases cost without providing any benefit.

|	AMD's PC or die decision into a similar cutset of Sun technology: port
|	your tools to Sparc, running Sunview initially.  Just as your PC stuff

So how does the cost of a Sparc compare to a PC? How does the user base
compare?

|	may eventually have to be moved on top of Windows 3.0, you may have
|	to move from Sunview to OpenLook.  The truth of software, and I assume

Which supports the contention that workstation support is a large cost.

|	you know this, is that it always entails ongoing investment in 
|	maintenance, support, and upgrades.  If you guys can't figure this 

Which doesn't mean that if you are spending one million dollars a year
on one platform, it's ok to spend two million dollars a year for two
platforms.

|	dollars :-)  After all, if Lotus Corp was able to make their peace 
|	with Suns, AMD should too...  FYI, companies with much less 
|	development bucks than Lotus & AMD are porting from PC -> Sparc,
|	eg P-CAD, CUPL, Pads-PCB, etc.

You seem to forget that these companies are making big bucks off their
software. How much does 123 cost? How about Pads-PCB? PALASM has been
free in the past and even now it is not very expensive.

|	Sorry, but this is becoming less of an option for many of us in 
|	hardware land.  My machine of choice for any engineering task is the 
|	sparcstation - if your tools don't run there, I will not buy them. 

This is interesting because I used to only use Unix also. I started
using PCs for exactly this reason: to run PALASM. Then I found they
weren't that bad and now I think they are very useful. Anyway, it's
only my opinion.

I'll add that this posting is like walking into a Sun User's Group
and saying "MIPS is good stuff", because anyone reading this is
almost guaranteed to be using Unix.  But that doesn't mean Unix is
the right home for PALASM, it just means all the readers here like
Unix. There are a lot of users who are not represented in this forum.
So I'm not going to be convinced by raw votes here.

|PS.  We do, or at least used to do, a lot of business with AMD (for pals, and
|     lance enet stuff) - so consider this message as constructive criticism 
|     from a customer.  Observe too that a smallish company named "Sun" uses
|     quite a lot of your stuff in their workstations, notably the 
|     sparcstation.  

What about this? When QD comes out with their DV/X, why don't you just
open up an X window to a PC which is your PALASM server?

--
Phil Ngai, phil@amd.com		{uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
Real Pacifists don't call the Police.