Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!pasteur!ames!amdahl!nsc!baer1
From: baer1@nsc.nsc.com (Jeffrey Baer)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.nsc.32k
Subject: Re: ICM-3216 questions
Keywords: ICM, 32016, minibus, MBIC, graphics, x.25, ICM-332, expansion
Message-ID: <10597@nsc.nsc.com>
Date: 15 Apr 89 17:44:34 GMT
References: <18414@gatech.edu> <1253@mmm.UUCP>
Reply-To: baer1@nsc.nsc.com.UUCP (Jeffrey Baer)
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Lines: 50

In article <1253@mmm.UUCP> schultz@mmm.UUCP (John C Schultz) writes:
>In article <18414@gatech.edu> ken@gatech.edu (Ken Seefried III) writes:
>>	What is the status of the ICM project at National (including
>>	the later ICM-332?  (I am under the impression it is dead).
>
>   The ICM project is pretty dead last I heard.  National kind of left
>it to hang out and dry (Why I am not sure).  In my case it is a pretty
>good reason not to consider using National stuff at work.

Ouch! This is pretty strong stuff. Although I am not completely familiar
with the rationale behind the demise of ICM, I do have some insight. 
The reasoning was partly technical: the ICM-3216 was a pretty good product
in general, but it has become somewhat outmoded compared to other things
on the market, both 32000-based and non-32000 based. Right now, the ICM
is considerably less than the best low-cost UNIX engine available (or not
available, as the case may be).  There were also internal National reasons 
(systems are a different market from what National is generally comfortable 
with), as well as the euphemistic "business considerations". Again, I do
not have "up to the minute" ICM news (ICM group has been in a completely 
different division from me for quite a while, which really means something
in a company of National's size), but it is clear, as was pointed out, that
the product doesn't have a rosy future.  I know other people with ICMs who 
are also frustrated, and I sympathize (some of them yell their frustrations 
at me). 

However, it is unfair to tar National with this brush because a product
became obsolete. Happens all the time. I had a heck of a time getting
parts for my last rather old car, but I didn't say "#&(**&(65%^$%, I'm
never buying a Ford again" (well, at least for that reason :-) ). I 
don't necessarily agree with the way everything is done around here (just ask
my boss), but NO company keeps a current line of every product ever made by
them in history. This is even more pervasive in this industry, unfortunately.
National, while far from innocent in this regard, is at least in good company.
I don't blame you for being mad or worse, but I'd reconsider indicting an
entire company and product portfolio based on one botch. 

> john c. schultz   schultz@3M.Com   ..!uiucuxc!mmm!schultz  (612) 733-4047
>           3M Center, Bldg 518-1-1, St. Paul, MN 55144-1000

My opinions are my opinions, and while they are awfully good, they are not
National's.

Jeff Baer
Series 32000 Applications Engineering
baer1@NSC.NSC.COM
-- 
"Nothing rings as true as silence."
Jeff Baer
National Semiconductor
baer1@NSC.NSC.COM