|> My |> comment regarding DEC was to indicate that I might be open to other |> vendors |> that supported OpenGL, rather than deal further with SGI.  OpenGL is a graphics programming library and as such is a great, portable interface for the development of interactive 3D graphics applications. It is not, however, an indicator of performance, as that will vary strongly from machine to machine and vendor to vendor.  SGI is committed to high performance interactive graphics systems and software tools, so OpenGL means that you can port easily from SGI to other platforms, there is no guarantee that your performance would be comparable.  |>  |> What I *am* annoyed about is the fact that we were led to believe that |> we *would* be able to upgrade to a multiprocessor version of the |> Crimson without the assistance of a fork lift truck.  If your sales representative truly mislead you, then you should have a valid grievance against us which you should carry up to your local SGI sales management team. Feel free to contact the local branch manager...we understand that repeat sales come from satisfied customers, so give it a shot.  |>  |> I'm also annoyed about being sold *several* Personal IRISes at a |> previous site on the understanding *that* architecture would be around |> for a while, rather than being flushed.  As one of the previous posts stated, the Personal IRIS was introduced in 1988 and grew to include the 4D/20, 4D/25, 4D/30 and 4D/35 as clock rates sped up over time. As a rule of thumb, SGI platforms live for about 4-5 years. This was true of the motorola-based 3000 series ('85-'89), the PI ('88-'93), the Professional Series (the early 4D's - '86-'90), the Power Series parallel systems ('88-'93). Individual CPU subsystems running at a particular clock rate usually live for about 2 years. New graphics architectures at the high end (GT, VGX, RealityEngine) are released every 18 months to 2 years.  These are the facts of life.  If we look at these machines, they become almost archaic after four years, and we have to come out with a new platform (like Indigo, Onyx, Challenge) which has higher bus bandwidths, faster CPUs, faster graphics and I/O, and larger disk capacities. If we don't, we become uncompetitive.  From the user perspective, you have to buy a machine that meets your current needs and makes economic sense today.  You can't wait to buy, but if you need a guaranteed upgrade path for the machine, ask the Sales Rep for one in writing. If it's feasible, they should be able to do that. Some of our upgrade paths have specific programs associated with them, such as the Performance Protection Program for older R3000-based Power Series multiprocessing systems which allowed purchasers of those systems to obtain a guaranteed upgrade price for moving to the new Onyx or Challenge R4400-based 64-bit multiprocessor systems.  |>  |> Now I understand that SGI is responsible to its investors and has to |> keep showing a positive quarterly bottom line (odd that I found myself |> pressured on at least two occasions to get the business on the books |> just before the end of the quarter), but I'm just a little tired of |> getting boned in the process. |>   If that's happening, it's becausing of misunderstandings or mis-communication, not because SGI is directly attempting to annoy our customer base.  |> Maybe it's because my lab buys SGIs in onesies and twosies, so we |> aren't entitled to a "peek under the covers" as the Big Kids (NASA, |> for instance) are.  This lab, and I suspect that a lot of other labs |> and organizations, doesn't have a load of money to spend on computers |> every year, so we can't be out buying new systems on a regular basis.  Most SGI customers are onesy-twosey types, but regardless, we rarely give a great deal of notice when we are about to introduce a new system because again, like a previous post stated, if we pre-announced and the schedule slipped, we would mess up our potential customers schedules (when they were counting on the availability of the new systems on a particular date) and would also look awfully bad to both our investors and the financial analysts who watch us most carefully to see if we are meeting our commitments.  |> The boxes that we buy now will have to last us pretty much through the |> entire grant period of five years and, in some case, beyond. That |> means that I need to buy the best piece of equipment that I can when I |> have the money, not some product that was built, to paraphrase one |> previous poster's words, 'to fill a niche' to compete with some other |> vendor.  I'm going to be looking at this box for the next five years. |> And every time I look at it, I'm going to think about SGI and how I |> could have better spent my money (actually *your* money, since we're |> supported almost entirely by Federal tax dollars). |>   Five years is an awfully long time in computer years. New processor technologies are arriving every 1-2 years, making a 5 year old computer at least 2 and probably 3 generations behind the times. The competitive nature of the market is demanding that rate of development, so if your timing is really 5 years between purchases, you have to accept the limited viability of whatever architecture you buy into from any vendor.  There are some realities about the computer biz that we all have to live with, but keeping customers happy is the most important, so don't give up, we know it.  Josh   |:-)  --