Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
From: Alec Cawley <alec@cawley.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Post Mortem
Organization: Home
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 18:41:15 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <dEedvEALzH70Ewjv@cawley.demon.co.uk>

In article <eC+O7QAYDB70EwCl@nice-eur.demon.co.uk>, Graham Nice
<graham@nice-eur.demon.co.uk> writes


>Inmos said that they were not interested  in
>modifying the T9 core to fit the SHARC requirements (claiming the T9000
>was a superior device and would be more successful !) and suggested the
>delegation go and talk to Analog Devices (ADI), who have some DSP cores
>and good processing technology.

This sums it up for me. Anybody in this ng will surely agree that inmos
had some great technology. However, the attitude always came over that
they though they had *all* the great tecnology. There was no willingness
to meet the market half way - or even a tenth of the way. 

-- 
Alec Cawley
Newbury
Berks, UK