Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!purdue!decwrl!pyramid!csg
From: csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Proposed architecture characterization survey form
Message-ID: <20175@pyramid.pyramid.com>
Date: 20 Apr 88 06:02:35 GMT
References: <20123@pyramid.pyramid.com> <577503463.14723@bucasb.bu.edu>
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 25

In article <577503463.14723@bucasb.bu.edu> rogerk@mips.com (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>It's funny, Carl: every time you've posted on RISC before, I've made some 
>piddling correction about the Celerity information.

Deja vu? I don't think this correction was piddling, though, since I may have
unintentionally scared some Celerity users into thinking that their machines
are orphans, which is certainly not true.

>Last week, it was announced that Floating Point Systems is in the process of
>acquiring Celerity's assets and liabilities....

Yes, I knew that, and have guarded hopes that the 6000 will be a reality. I
say guarded, since we really don't know what FPS will do. (If you've ever been
in the middle of a takeover, you'll know that even what your old president is
told is suspect, let alone the grunt engineers, let alone the media.)

My point, though, was that out of the first five commercial RISC ventures,
three flopped. Now don't misunderstand; I suspect that if Celerity had the
kind of financial backing that Ridge and the PC/RT had (Ridge raised $20
Million after they had already failed once), it would have been successful.
But the road to RISC has been a rocky one. 

Can someone from Ridge comment on their health?

<csg>