Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site aum.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!lll-crg!qantel!ptsfa!aum!freed
From: freed@aum.UUCP (Erik Freed)
Newsgroups: net.arch,net.micro.68k
Subject: Re: Asynchronous State machines
Message-ID: <405@aum.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 21-Nov-85 11:28:40 EST
Article-I.D.: aum.405
Posted: Thu Nov 21 11:28:40 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 24-Nov-85 07:23:46 EST
References: <295@geowhiz.UUCP>
Organization: The Aurora Systems Bunch
Lines: 26
Xref: watmath net.arch:2147 net.micro.68k:1360

> In article <5841@tekecs.UUCP> johnt@tekecs.UUCP (John Theus) writes:
> >Let me speak with some recent production design experience with asynchronous
> >state machines (ASMs).
> >For my money, it is hard to beat a properly designed ASM.  On the projects
> >we recently completed, the Tek 6200 series of workstations, the compute
> 			    ^^^^^^^^
> 
> You may correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Tek just drop this
> series of workstations?
> -- 
> Larry McVoy						+----------------+

Larry,
	Am I the only one who feels that this is pretty lame? Even if it is
true (I don't know) Implying that the design is likely to be responsible is
just not realistic. I am sure that for the many of us who have experienced 
the aggravation of our designs not seeing the light of day in the market, 
most of these cases involved pure and simple marketing decisions. This kind
of needling is not in the best spirit of the net and can hit home painfully
to someone who has perhaps spent a lot of hard hours on a project...
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Erik James Freed
			   Aurora Systems
			   San Francisco, CA
			   {dual,ptsfa}!aum!freed