Bitstring <(E-Mail Removed)>, from the
wonderful person Keith <(E-Mail Removed)> said
<snip>
>> And I can recall significant scrambling around
>> various IBM facilities to keep those ATC triplex 360/65s running so that
>> folks could continue to ride airplanes around. Something about the
>> planned replacement project crashing and burning so that the 360s had to
>> be maintained for another while. I wonder if the replacement 3081s are
>> still there?
>
>I remember having to redesign Germanium transistors and dodes out
>of several circuits to keep /360s running. It seems someone found
>that the only company still making Ge was a garage outfit; scared
>the hell out of the PHBs!

I can recall the rebuilding and restarting of a particular discrete
transistor manufacturing facility, just to make (a few!) replacement
(silicon alloy, iirc) transistors for a particular military program (~10
years after production had quit and the parts were obsolete). Amazing
what you can do with bottomless coffers.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 20:52:13 +0000, GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:

> Bitstring <(E-Mail Removed)>, from the
> wonderful person Keith <(E-Mail Removed)> said
> <snip>
>>> And I can recall significant scrambling around
>>> various IBM facilities to keep those ATC triplex 360/65s running so that
>>> folks could continue to ride airplanes around. Something about the
>>> planned replacement project crashing and burning so that the 360s had to
>>> be maintained for another while. I wonder if the replacement 3081s are
>>> still there?
>>
>>I remember having to redesign Germanium transistors and dodes out
>>of several circuits to keep /360s running. It seems someone found
>>that the only company still making Ge was a garage outfit; scared
>>the hell out of the PHBs!
>
> I can recall the rebuilding and restarting of a particular discrete
> transistor manufacturing facility, just to make (a few!) replacement
> (silicon alloy, iirc) transistors for a particular military program (~10
> years after production had quit and the parts were obsolete).

I had another situation in the early '90s where TI obsoleted a part (O.C.
TTL bi-di driver) I was using in the S/3090 integrated crypto feature. The
feature didn't sell all that well on the 3090s, partly since they were
pretty much end-of-life when the feature was announced, but a late order
came in. We had to go back and get them to restart the part number for a
run of a hundred (only really needed five). The "spares" went into stock
in case they were ever needed for replacement parts. Sure enough, a few
years later (after I'd moved on) they got an order for a few more boxes,
but they'd thrown away the "spares" in a PHB directed cost-cutting move.

> Amazing what you can do with bottomless coffers.

....or unlimited purchasing clout. ;-)

--
Keith

Keith wrote:

>I had another situation in the early '90s where TI obsoleted a part (O.C.
>TTL bi-di driver) I was using in the S/3090 integrated crypto feature. The
>feature didn't sell all that well on the 3090s, partly since they were
>pretty much end-of-life when the feature was announced, but a late order
>came in. We had to go back and get them to restart the part number for a
>run of a hundred (only really needed five). The "spares" went into stock
>in case they were ever needed for replacement parts. Sure enough, a few
>years later (after I'd moved on) they got an order for a few more boxes,
>but they'd thrown away the "spares" in a PHB directed cost-cutting move.

My company still makes occasional windfall profits from ISA-bus
products that have been obsoleted, then revived because some customer
wants another batch. "Okay, we'll make some more, but it's gonna cost
you." 8)

On the other hand, the EISA-bus computers that I kept, just because I
someday might need them again, have not been needed. 8)

Bitstring <(E-Mail Removed)>, from the
wonderful person chrisv <(E-Mail Removed)> said
<snip>
>On the other hand, the EISA-bus computers that I kept, just because I
>someday might need them again, have not been needed. 8)

They will be, but not until a week after you throw them out. 8>.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:23:02 -0600, chrisv wrote:

> Keith wrote:
>
>>I had another situation in the early '90s where TI obsoleted a part (O.C.
>>TTL bi-di driver) I was using in the S/3090 integrated crypto feature. The
>>feature didn't sell all that well on the 3090s, partly since they were
>>pretty much end-of-life when the feature was announced, but a late order
>>came in. We had to go back and get them to restart the part number for a
>>run of a hundred (only really needed five). The "spares" went into stock
>>in case they were ever needed for replacement parts. Sure enough, a few
>>years later (after I'd moved on) they got an order for a few more boxes,
>>but they'd thrown away the "spares" in a PHB directed cost-cutting move.
>
> My company still makes occasional windfall profits from ISA-bus
> products that have been obsoleted, then revived because some customer
> wants another batch. "Okay, we'll make some more, but it's gonna cost
> you." 8)

Do they want you to make PCI versions? (It's not tough and might make
some more <shift>$$$)
>
> On the other hand, the EISA-bus computers that I kept, just because I
> someday might need them again, have not been needed. 8)

EISA was a disaster from day one. It was a non-standard. Dump 'em.

--
Keith

Keith wrote:

>> My company still makes occasional windfall profits from ISA-bus
>> products that have been obsoleted, then revived because some customer
>> wants another batch. "Okay, we'll make some more, but it's gonna cost
>> you." 8)
>
>Do they want you to make PCI versions? (It's not tough and might make
>some more <shift>$$$)

We've been making PCI equivalents for years (not surprisingly). Some
customers just want the same hardware (and it's associated software)
that they already use and know works.

Keith wrote:

>EISA was a disaster from day one. It was a non-standard. Dump 'em.

Yeah, PCI was a Godsend. Bye bye EISA. Bye bye S-bus. Bye bye
NuBus. Bye bye MCA...

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed)lid says...
> Keith wrote:
>
> >EISA was a disaster from day one. It was a non-standard. Dump 'em.
>
> Yeah, PCI was a Godsend. Bye bye EISA. Bye bye S-bus. Bye bye
> NuBus. Bye bye MCA...
>
Granted, things are *better*, but at least NuBus, MCA, et.al
worked. EISA was specified not to work and it lived up to its
specification.

--
Keith

"Keith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> (E-Mail Removed)lid says...
>> Keith wrote:
>>
>> >EISA was a disaster from day one. It was a non-standard. Dump 'em.
>>
>> Yeah, PCI was a Godsend. Bye bye EISA. Bye bye S-bus. Bye bye
>> NuBus. Bye bye MCA...
>>
> Granted, things are *better*, but at least NuBus, MCA, et.al
> worked. EISA was specified not to work and it lived up to its
> specification.
>
> --
> Keith

It did work exactly as Compaq intended for it to work. It killed
microchannel pcs.

del

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
>
> "Keith" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > (E-Mail Removed)lid says...
> >> Keith wrote:
> >>
> >> >EISA was a disaster from day one. It was a non-standard. Dump 'em.
> >>
> >> Yeah, PCI was a Godsend. Bye bye EISA. Bye bye S-bus. Bye bye
> >> NuBus. Bye bye MCA...
> >>
> > Granted, things are *better*, but at least NuBus, MCA, et.al
> > worked. EISA was specified not to work and it lived up to its
> > specification.
> >
> > --
> > Keith
>
> It did work exactly as Compaq intended for it to work. It killed
> microchannel pcs.

Mortally wounded, perhaps. MCA didn't die until after PCI was well
established.

--
Keith