Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!fernwood!portal!analog2!calvin!craig
From: craig@calvin.UUCP (Craig S. Cochran)
Newsgroups: comp.lsi
Subject: Re: no PALASM90 on workstations
Keywords: PAL PALASM AMD
Message-ID: <482@calvin.UUCP>
Date: 6 Aug 90 18:29:03 GMT
References: <833@hls0.hls.oz> <1990Aug5.070528.4522@amd.com>
Reply-To: sun!valid!ccochran (Craig S. Cochran)
Followup-To: comp.lsi
Organization: Valid Logic Systems - San Jose, CA.
Lines: 30

In article <1990Aug5.070528.4522@amd.com> phil@brahms.amd.com (Phil Ngai) writes:
>PALASM90 for Suns? Which Suns? Sun-3? Sun-386i? Sparc? Which OS of
>the week? (when we upgraded the OS, it broke "less".) Which window
>system? Suntools? Sunview? X? News? Now take all these choices and
>multiply them together. Sun-3 with X. Sun-3 with News. Sun-3 with
>Sunview. Sparc with X. Sparc with News. Sparc with Sunview. etc.

Only two necessary:
Sun-3 and Sun-4 (Sparc), both under Sunview, would probably cover 90%
of Sun's installed base.

>I suggest you buy a nice cheap and fast PC, get PC-NFS for networking
>and MKS toolkit to make the command set somewhat like Unix. You
>might even find you have a nice word processor in the bargain.

User's shouldn't have to buy more hardware to use a simple PLD programming
tool.  Most people have already invested mucho-$ in Sun or other workstations
to run CAE or layout software.  I would hate to tell our (Valid's) users
they had to purchase more hardware (especially DOS - yuck!) just to interface
from our CAE software to PALASM.  In fact, I would probably recommend a
different PLD solution (such as MINC) simply for the reason that it runs
on the same hardware under the same OS.

Is AMD only interested in the small companies doing limited design work
on PCs?

-- 
Craig S. Cochran                           Valid Logic Systems
Path:  {sun,decwrl}!valid!ccochran         2820 Orchard Parkway
Voice: 408/944-8037                        San Jose, CA  95134