From: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Computer architects forced to change careers. NOT!
Date: 14 Sep 92 14:58:23 GMT
	<1992Sep9.213319.7894@fasttech.uucp> <AKI.92Sep10131943@akix.UUCP>
Reply-To: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi)
Organization: Prifysgol Cymru, Aberystwyth

On 10 Sep 92 21:19:43 GMT, aki@akix.UUCP (Aki Atoji) said:

aki> Having worked with different CPU's of varying successes in market
aki> place (i.e.  NS32K, x86, 29K and 960), I would have to say that the
aki> so called 'technological superiority' of an architecture is often
aki> *not* the only single important item for more design wins.

Applause for common sense! About the only 'superior' architecture that I
know of that has 'won' is the Acorn ARM, which is one of the better
designed RISCs _and_ is probably by far the most widely sold under some
metric in some market.

aki> There really are numerous factors in getting design wins and thus
aki> more market acceptance, such as pricing, availability, marketing,
aki> product positioning in market place, tools (compilers, emulators,
aki> etc.), how many freebies (i.e. compilers, eval board, eval chips)
aki> the salescreature will give to you, etc. etc (free lunches would
aki> count too, hint, hint :).

Case in point the ARM: the fact that it is well designed has had nothing
to do with its being probably, in some sense, the most popular RISC chip
ever. The fact that it is used in cheap home computers that are sold in
vast consumer number probably has got more to do with it.

Simplistic reasoning about the 432, the 960, or other designs, and the
careers of their designers seem to me less than interesting.

Incidentally, on the 960: fairly credible rumour has it that Intel
deliberately throttled it both technically and marketing wise to avoid
jeopardizing even incidentally the sales of far more profitable x86
chips. And that it was kept going at all as insurance for the future,
and as a way to let frustated designers let off steam.

aki>	[ ... more sensible and not simplistic opinions omitted ... ]

aki> When 29K first came out, with it's MMU and three bus design, I'm
aki> sure AMD's intent behind the design of the architecture was not to
aki> be one of the most dominant RISC designs in the *embedded* market,
aki> which it is now.

And surely the Intel designers that added a sophisticated MMU to the 286
and sophisticated paging the the 386 hoped it would not continue to run
MSDOS forever. Many times I think that certain features in certain chips
are put in more because of designer's pride then of any estimate of
market demand.

aki> But then again, the number of 29K shipped is likely far less than
aki> the 68K derivatives shipped (someone have actual numbers?).

These are not so important, because the count always depends on how you
segment things by time/market. On the other hand, as you probably
obliquely implied above, AMD claims that the number of 29k shipped for
embedded applications dwarfs that of all workstation RISC chips.

aki> However, these numbers are simply dwarfed by the number of 8051
aki> derivatives shipped world wide.

Isn't it the case that the 4004/8008 are still shipped in substantial
numbers? A few years ago it was still true...

Ah, if only success/failure were so easy to assess! It is well known
that the AS/400 architecture/series is roaringly successful. It is less
know that initial IBM plans targeted it for a role in which it had very
disappointing sales, and it sold very well, taking IBM by surprise, for
a role that they had not really positioned it for. So, was it as failure
or a success?

Maybe it was a marketing failure ("fire the architects and the
marketdroids for getting the positioning totally wrong") and a business
success ("rehire them because they were lucky").

Napoleon used to say that the first quality he sought in his generals
was luck, and competence was a far distant second...
--
Piercarlo Grandi                   | JNET: pcg@uk.ac.aber
Dept of CS, University of Wales    | UUCP: ...!aber-cs!pcg
Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3BZ, UK | INET: pcg@aber.ac.uk
Xref: sparky comp.arch:9357 comp.parallel:2107