A Smaller, Healthier Supercomputer Industry

Let's look at what fewer companies and better R&D focus might bring:

1. The CRAY Y-MP  architecture  is just fine. It provides the larger address space of the CRAY-2. The CRAY-3 line, based on a new  architecture , will further sap the community of skilled systems-software and applications-builder resources. Similarly, Supercomputer Systems, Inc., (Steve Chen's startup) is most likely inventing a new  architecture  that requires new systems software and applications. Why have three

 architectures  for which people have to be trained so they can support operating systems and write applications?

2. Resources could be deployed on circuits and packaging to build GaAs or more aggressive ECL-based or even chilled CMOS designs instead of more supercomputer  architectures  and companies.

3. Companies that have much of the world's compiler expertise, such as Burton Smith's Tera Computer Company or SSI in San Diego, could help any of the current super companies. It's unlikely that any funding will come from within the U.S. to fund these endeavors once the government is forced into some fiscal responsibility and can no longer fund them. Similarly, even if these efforts get Far-East funding, it is unlikely they will succeed.

4. Government support could be more focused. Supporting the half-dozen companies by R&D and purchase orders just has to mean higher taxes that won't be repaid. On the other hand, continuing subsidies of the parallel machines is unrealistic in the 1990s if better  architectures  become available. A more realistic approach is to return to the policy of making the funds available to buy parallel machines, including ordinary supers, but to not force the purchase of particular machines.