7 Aug
2012
7 Aug
'12
1:29 p.m.
On 7 Aug 2012 at 15:58, William Donzelli wrote:
Well, so did the 1401 and 1620. Supercomputers only if you were on a
controlled substance, I guess. Uniprocessor supercomputers had the
problem that they were very much bleeding-edge affairs, with little
thought given to maintenance or resource consumption. Parts were
often custom fab, assemblies could be hell on wheels to service.
Wasn't the MTTR for "Bubbles" something like 8 hours? I know it was
very high for the ETA-10 also.
I suspect the number of still-in-use 80s uniprocessor supercomputers
would probably be a close match to the number of extant Saxpy Matrix-
1s.
--Chuck
I'd hardly
call a System/3 a "supercomputer".
It did have FORTRAN! I wonder what kind of a trainwreck that was.