Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!uceng!minerva!dmocsny From: dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Be Prepared... Message-ID: <7534@uceng.UC.EDU> Date: 24 Feb 91 16:29:05 GMT References: <7517@uceng.UC.EDU> <12064@pt.cs.cmu.edu> Sender: news@uceng.UC.EDU Organization: University of Cincinnati, Cin'ti., OH Lines: 50 In article glew@pdx007.intel.com (Andy Glew) writes: >Anecdote: Gould NP1 was supposed to be a massive memory system. It was not >supposed to be shipped with less than 256 megabytes of memory. This was based >on the company's chief technical guru's projections of where DRAM prices >were headed. > But then the DRAM drought occurred, when all the US companies got >out of memory production, and DRAM prices and densities stayed nearly >level for a few years. This was certainly a short-term problem for Gould, and in the fast- moving computer industry, short-term problems can be fatal. However, from an historical perspective, was the DRAM shortage anything more than a temporary glitch? I.e., did it perturb the historical DRAM price trend in any noticeable way? From what I have read, the DRAM shortage was a combination of unforeseen increases in user demand vs. capacity reductions due to falling profit margins, plus a healthy dose of USA gov't. protectionist intervention. While we can't predict the future of gov't. trade policy, we can certainly argue that increasing user DRAM demand by itself is unlikely to interrupt DRAM price trends permanently. That is because DRAM production uses little in the way of permanently scarce resources (as far as I know). As long as the price level is high enough to insure that someone makes a profit, DRAM makers should (eventually) be able to meet any demand. In most other industries, two years to respond to a demand surge is not such a big deal. But in the computer industry, that is a whole product generation. It is also enough time for your competitor to double in size. > The NP1 UNIX team used a lot of those ideas for using cheap memory. >And then memory wasn't so cheap anymore... Yes, but if the rest of the industry had been as smart as Gould, the DRAM shortage wouldn't have occurred. Gould understood the utility of big memory, as well as the desire of users to buy and use big memory. Too bad for Gould, and the users, that the other decision-makers were mostly members of the "Desktop users do not need more than X KB" crowd. While users have trouble using all the computer power they can get their hands on, because of vendor-produced obstacles like poor ergonomics, incompatibilities, etc., the general rule is simple: the more you lower the "total-system" cost of computer power, the more of it users will buy. -- Dan Mocsny Internet: dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com