The current mainstream memory offering is 70n/s and we are at 50n/s. The
memory is not proprietary - any manufacturer could buy it if their system could
drive it fast enough!
Silicon Graphics Inc.
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, dmanddmer wrote:
->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.
--- Begin Message ---
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)
firstname.lastname@example.org | 1.800.800.SGI1 (Sales) 1.800.800.4SGI (Support)
DID 1.614.844.3820 | http://www.nintendo.com/ (N64, the $130 SGI!)
--- End Message ---