Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
From: paul@walker.demon.co.uk (Paul Walker)
Subject: Boards for PC. Was LOOKING FOR DISTRIBUTORS...
Organization: Paul Walker Consultancy
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 09:03:46 +0000
Message-ID: <780743026snz@walker.demon.co.uk>

In article <36976v$5qh@xmission.xmission.com>
           altatech@xmission.com "Alta Technology" writes:

>Paul Walker (paul@walker.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: If I may be permitted a mini-plug of my own:
>
>: A problem with most existing transputer host interface boards is that they
>: are designed for a single process running on the host, with a single
>: channel in each direction. [..]
>
>Altatech provides 2 ISA and 1 EISA tram holder board designs; each with four
>links to the host; making the host work just like a tram.  We've been supplying
> this
>design for many years, with both hard links and virtual channels. [...]

Sounds like a good product. Having read the sales literature for it again
this morning though, one could be excused for not noticing these benefits.

But there is still (plenty of) room for improvement:

Andy Rabagliati has pointed out on this group that if you want a 
fast interface from the PC to transputers, then use Ethernet. The 
standard NE2000 compatible Ethernet boards provide master access on ISA,
which is inexpensive and fast (well up to 5Mbytes/s).

Does anyone want the expense of EISA in order to get master access?

Does anyone want the 30MBytes/s that EISA offers in master access?

The slave access on the ALTA ISA board (1.5Mbytes/s) is hardly faster 
than Ethernet. So is it worth having?

I repeat that IMHO, the Coral board is currently the best interface 
to the PC, and that, again IMHO, it can be improved by designing 
explicitly for virtual channels.

But the Alta boards come in a good second. Sorry I did not mention them.


Paul Walker              Consultancy in product specification and design
+44 1275 844864          paul@walker.demon.co.uk


