[Fwd: linus.linux.sgi.com]

[dmanddmer <dmerchan@hiwaay.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 435 bytes --]

Btw, I heard a rumor that the memory in the VPC is custom or unique
memory.  Is this true?  How much of the VPC, besides the obvious, is not
industry standard?  If SGI is attempting solely to require customers to
be able to buy any upgrades ONLY from SGI, then SGI has shot itself in
the foot again.  It did not work for Apple, it didn't work for Unisys,
it didn't work for Intergraph.  In short, it hasn't worked for anyone.

David M.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 3250 bytes --]

From: david@carrera.columbus.sgi.com (David Watters)
To: dmanddmer <dmerchan@hiwaay.net>
Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 10:30:47 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <9901191030.ZM37783@carrera.columbus.sgi.com>

On Jan 19,  5:21am, dmanddmer wrote:
> Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
> Personally, since SGI made the questionable decision to port to NT, I
> wish they would commit to AMD's processors instead of Intels.

SGI couldn't.  SGI had to replace so much of the IA/440xx chipset that there
had to be a prettty big agreement with Intel covering a lot of issues,
machines, processors, and markets to allow SGI to, for example, implement
the frontside bus in their own chipset.  Don't forget all those Co'op
marketing dollars too. -dong ^dong -dong ^^dong

> Porting to NT alone is probably not enough to save the company.  It
> didn't work for Intergraph.

Yeah, but Intergraph is lame so they had that working against them too. :)


-- 
David Watters         |                 Silicon*Graphics 
Systems Engineer      |                http://www.sgi.com/ 
Silicon Graphics, Inc.|    http://reality.sgi.com/davester/  (6/13/97) 
david.watters@sgi.com |  1.800.800.SGI1 (Sales) 1.800.800.4SGI (Support) 
DID 1.614.844.3820    |   http://www.nintendo.com/ (N64, the $130 SGI!)