Conference 7.286::digital

  DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION ANNOUNCES ALPHA AXP SECOND SOURCE
         RELATIONSHIP WITH MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION


MAYNARD, MASS. -- March 16, 1993 -- Digital Equipment Corporation 
announced today that Mitsubishi Electric Corporation will become a 
second source for Digital's Alpha AXP microprocessor architecture. 
Mitsubishi will manufacture and sell Digital-designed versions of 
Alpha AXP microprocessor chips, as well as build and sell its own 
designs based on the Alpha AXP architecture.  By providing a second 
source of Alpha AXP microprocessors, Digital is furthering its 
commitment to establish the Alpha AXP 64-bit architecture as an 
open market standard.
    "We are very pleased to work with a company with the 
manufacturing and technological excellence of Mitsubishi,"  said 
Robert B. Palmer, President and Chief Executive Officer, Digital 
Equipment Corporation.  "Together we have the capabilities to make 
the Alpha AXP architecture successful in applications ranging from 
high-volume desktop and embedded markets to the high-performance 
supercomputing market.  Digital's strategic goal has been to foster 
innovation and competitive pricing in the marketplace by 
establishing other sources of supply for Alpha AXP microprocessors."
    "We are looking forward to a very successful long-term 
relationship with Digital," said Takashi Kitaoka, President of 
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation.  "We are planning to actively 
promote the development and manufacture of the Alpha AXP RISC chip.  
This cooperative business arrangement with Digital Equipment 
Corporation will be vital in the process."
    Mitsubishi chose the Alpha AXP architecture because of its 
performance leadership, scalability and broad spectrum of operating 
environments supported.  The operating systems supported include 
OpenVMS and unified UNIX, and emerging market standards such as 
Microsoft's Windows NT.  
    Mitsubishi will manufacture, market and sell Alpha AXP chips 
including new designs developed by Mitsubishi. This will be 
accomplished in a phased approach where initially Mitsubishi will 
manufacture and sell Alpha AXP chips based on Digital's chip 
designs. Production is scheduled to begin in late 1994.  Digital is 
currently shipping Alpha AXP chips in volume from its multiple 
semiconductor fabrication sites. 
    The relationship is an important part of Digital's strategy to 
establish Alpha AXP as a widely used open market standard.  The 
company announced the Alpha AXP architecture one year ago, and 
introduced its first systems based on the architecture in November, 
1992.  More than 35 Alpha AXP partners have announced their adoption 
of the Alpha AXP architecture, including Cray Research, Encore, ACRI 
(Advanced Computer Research International), Kubota Pacific, 
Olivetti, Raytheon, and Aeon Systems.

    Mitsubishi Electric Corporation is a leading manufacturer of 
electrical and electronic equipment. With an aim of harmonizing 
high technology with the human society in all aspects, the company 
is endeavoring to manufacture products of high quality and 
reliability. Its businesses range from home appliances, information 
processing and communications systems, semiconductors and electronic 
devices to such areas as equipment for automobiles and industrial 
use, transportation systems, energy-related equipment and space 
products.
Note to Editors:  Alpha AXP, AXP, DEC, Digital, and OpenVMS are 
                  trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation.

		  OSF and OSF/1 are registered trademarks of Open 
                  Software Foundation, Inc.

		  Microsoft is a registered trademark and Windows NT 
                  is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation.
 

    Wonder how much we paid em.
    Details of the agreement would be interesting.  Intel has an agreement
    with IBM that IBM not manufacture more than 50% of the (486 variants
    for now) chips in it's own machines, and also has agreements on
    mounting, etc.  I wonder if DEC was desperate enuf to land any
    second source (in this case, 8th place in the semi world) that
    Mitsubish was able to avoid constraints that might interfere
    with future dumping.

>    Wonder how much we paid em.
    
    Wonder how much royalty DEC gets from each chip.
    
    And if it's in $ or �.
    
     John

Great News!!!

I wonder if Mitsubishi plans to use the chip in any of
it's own products?

That would be great if they used it in some of their
high end electrical stuff!

Nadeem

    This is precisely how Japan got a lock on the consumer electronic
    products market. They "licensed" the technology, "changed" it, patented
    the changed products, and then dumped them on the US market for as long
    as it took to run the US manufacturers out of business.
    
    Why don't we ever learn?
    
    kbs
    

	Mitsubishi Digital.....has a nice ring to it.....

    Mitsubishi already makes Digital sound recording equipment...
    

    One of the most prevalent rumors of the past 10 years is that Digital
    was going to be "bought" by Mitsubishi...
    
    Dave W.
    

re       <<< Note 2417.5 

>    This is precisely how Japan got a lock on the consumer electronic
>    products market. They "licensed" the technology, "changed" it, patented
>    the changed products, and then dumped them on the US market for as long
>    as it took to run the US manufacturers out of business.
 
The Japan bashing is getting a little strong here.  Intel licensed early 
x86 chips which came back into the country as V20 and V30 chips.  It didn't 
seem to hurt them too badly. :)

I think having a dependable second source is great.  There are several 
experienced computer buyers who know that single sourcing is a high risk.  
We have been able to avoid part of that up to now based on the low volumes 
and the commitment that we were searching for a second source.

Would you rather us not have a second source, which may well mean that many 
people will not buy from us?  Is your fear that the Ed Caldwell's people 
have written a contract that will cause us to lose access to future 
designs?  Do you think we will make versions of Alpha AXP that address 
markets we are not interested in addressing end user products to?  

I would doubt that Intel and Motorola would meet your needs in a second 
source.  IBM is the largest IC producer and they too would probably be a 
poor choice.  LSI Logic is rather tied into Sun, as is TI.  Which large 
U.S. vendor should an ethnocentric company select?  

I would be happy to see Seimens or Philips in Europe become an additional 
source over time.  We are not a U.S. company, we are a part of a 
multi-national company with truely global concerns.  Thinking small will 
lead us to being small.

Matt

    Does this mean we'll finally be able to get Japaneese cars 
    on Plan A??  :-]

    >This is precisely how Japan got a lock on the consumer electronic   
    >products market. They "licensed" the technology, "changed" it,
    >patented the changed products, and then dumped them on the US
    >market for as long as it took to run the US manufacturers out of
    >business.
    
    I spend a lot of time with various discrete manufacturers in this
    country, and I think that after a three year "survey" it's safe to say
    that US manufacturers help themselves go out of business rather than
    external competition.  The state of product development is actually
    worse than described, in some areas (Detroit is finally seeing the
    light..I think and hope).
    
    /d.c.

    	Basically our reaction come to the fact that the ONLY two areas
    of technology (bigger than computers itself) that are increasing in
    volume are CMOS and Software.   Therefore, our top management wants
    to bank on the fact that in order to make a CMOS technology fly is to
    become 'industry standard' (ie: Intel 386, 486 and soon 586 or
    Microsoft's MS/DOS Operating system).   If you have other companies
    (like Mitsubishi, which by the way is one of the world's largest
    corporations manufacturing from radios/TV's, Autos, Trucks, Banks,
    Rockets, etc.,etc.,etc,........) we may become the standard....oh by
    the way the S/W is OSF/1 distributed by yours truly (DEC).  If we are
    succesful, we may have done the right thing, however like anything else
    everery knife get two cutting ends, Mitsubishi can turn around better
    our Alpha Chip, patent the improved version and literally 'kill us with
    our own guns'.
    

    DANGEROUS !! 
    Anyone try to purchase an American made TV lately. Japan
    has consistantly "licensed" the critical part of a product, ie: LCD display
    for laptops, then, being the sole source of the item offered to
    "license" and produce the product. Guess what folks. Next thing Japan
    owns the market, American company can't compete, and American workers
    are out of jobs. 
    I am not Japan bashing, but Japan views business as war. 
    Spoils to the victors.
    Until now Japan has not been able to succeed in the microprocessor
    marketplace as it is a "moving target", ie: there is no critical
    component. Digital may have just given them the critical component to
    the next generation of computing. If that is the case we should all be
    learning Japanese.
    
    Terry

	Way back when Alpha was first being announced and pushed in the
	industry press, there was concern from analysts, third parties, and
	OEMs that Digital would not be able to keep up with demand, and that
	this would limit our ability to establish Alpha as any sort of
	standard.

	The fact is that without a reliable second source, we would not be
	credible in trying to achieve our apparent goal with Alpha - to
	become a generic platform on which multiple hardware vendors base
	their systems. The Mitsubishi deal makes boatloads of sense in light
	of these goals.

	Roy

RE: Various psuedo or outright Japan bashing notes...

I recommend that you all read Robert Reich's (Secretary of Labor) book
"The Work of Nations".  You may or may not agree with his "solutions" but
I think his description of the world is awfully tough to argue with.

Basically...

-There is no such thing as an American Company (over 50% of DEC's business 
	is outside of the US, Honda cars have more US content than many of
	GM's, Ford's and Chrysler's)

-The important measurement is what value is added in a given country.  (If our
	designs are the best, Mitsubishi will continue to pay us royalties.
	They will always pay us royalties for the architecture.  Isn't a
	"royalty export" (us exporting our designs) just as good as a hard
	goods export?

-The wealth of a nation is measured by what its people can do, not by natural
	resources or other traditional measures.

-The major value added is increasingly the ability to devine new solutions to
	problems.

Now, back to the regularly scheduled discussion...

This is GREAT NEWS!!!!!

We have needed a second source and now we have one.  The fact that it is a 
Japanese company (if there is such a thing as a Japanese company) has a very
bright side.  The other side of Japan discussions are that their markets are
closed.  If you believe this, wouldn't you want Mitsubishi pushing our product
(Alpha architecture and chip designs) into a market that we don't have access
to?

Also, as with anything, the first relationship is the toughest.  Now that
Mitsubishi is signed up, Siemens etc. will be easier to get.

Ken Slattery 

I also find the Japan-bashing here ludicrous.  We have international patents
on the Alpha AXP architecture, not just the layout of the chip, and nobody
can make an Alpha chip without a license from us.  Seen any VAX chips from
Japan?

I agree with those who say this is "great news".  We have a MAJOR world-wide
industrial corporation signing on as a backer of the Alpha architecture, and
we can only benefit from it.

				Steve

    You disagree, fine. But please do _not_ call any reservations about
    licensing technology to another country "Country X bashing." Using that
    logic I can call any disagreement with my point of view as "Ken
    bashing." Disagreements are just that. Calling them "bashing" simply
    attempts to stiffle dissent. ::DIGITAL is not a Politically Correct 
    forum. And you wouldn't want it so, would you ...?
    
    
    kbs
    

   In the rush to feel properly indignant about transfer of technology, it's
   dumb on the part of engineers especially to classify it as "copying
   technology, making modifications and making new patents". It wasn't exactly
   that when it comes to Japanese Engineers. Consumer electronics especially
   has seen very great strides in innovation and improvement in Japan.
   They have started out with very wild ideas (such as "how can we make
   a camcorder that fits in your palm") and made them happen. 

   It's dumb on the part of engineers elsewhere in the world to focus on
   the trade practices of Japan and let engineering and product development
   lessons that they may impart go by unlearnt. The real response on the part
   of engineers is to rise up to innovation like them and make sure that
   they bridge the huge gap that exists between excellent research and
   wise, productive and profitable applications of such research. A good
   example is research on Fuzzy Logic. It's looked down upon (without
   understanding what it is) by the general Computer Science community.
   Meanwhile Japanese Engineers have put it to use in Vacuum cleaners, 
   electric irons and a myriad other applications. So goes Robotics research 
   too.

   Let's separate the trade issues from the technological ones. Political
   issues should not cloud scientific and engineering reasoning. We would
   just be shooting ourselves in the foot and missing at that.

   Nari

   

If America and Americans spent a little less time Japan-Bashing, in fact 
bashing in general, and a bit more time innovating, there'd be noone to 
bash. Whatever happened to America, the most technologically advanced nation 
on the planet, witht he most productive workforce in the world?

Don't forget the lessons learned from Lincoln Arcwelding during WWII. They 
GAVE their designs to the competition in order to get more weapons built. 
Even having given their designs to the competition, they are still number 
one in their business today - 50+ yrs later.

In that company, every new hire spends a week or more learning about the ins 
and outs of acrwelding - every one. This includes secretaries and janitors. 
Product improvement ideas and new product ideas come from all over the 
company. Groups do not try to out do one another, they build on one anothers 
ideas. (ie no political in-fighting) It's no wonder they are successful...

	This was in UK national VTX on Monday - if this is the case,
	noone is producing enough chips yet, joining with a Japanese
	company maybe the smartest thing we've done.

	Both to Tap the US AND Japanese markets.

	Heather


    INDUSTRY NEWS 16-Mar-93       Digital Internal Communication            


    JAPAN ASSERTS THAT THE US IS NOT FILLING ORDERS

    Japan's electronics industry is preparing data to show that American
    semiconductor companies failed to deliver millions of dollars worth of
    computer chips ordered by Japanese companies earlier in the year, thus
    contributing to the US failure to achieve a 20% share of the Japanese
    market, as called for in a semiconductor trade agreement.  A recent US
    boom in demand for computer chips had caused American suppliers to
    divert products from Japan to the US, causing hardship for Japanese
    customers.  American industry officials say they are not favouring
    American customers at the expense of Japanese ones because American
    companies are also unable to get all the chips they need.

    The International Herald Tribune, Saturday 13 march 1993

     Herein lies part of the success of Japan.  Their public relations folk 
have created a wealth of Americans who are willing to rail against ANY 
criticism of their business practices, using emotional buzz-words like 
"Japan-Bashing".  Any discussion of Japan's large corporations behaving 
as a unit (at times) is laughed off as a foolish belief in Japan Inc.  Any 
attempt to cease the unilateral trade disamament that allows Japan to keep 
American business out of certain Japanese markets while Japan is free to enter 
our markets is called "Protectionism".  People fear the buzz-words, so 
they work well.

     In the case of Mitsubishi, it is a done deal, so there is no point in
arguing against it.  What it does give us is the impetus to improve upon our
own design.  At this point, we are at least even with Mitsubishi.  If we avoid
resting on our laurels, we have nothing to fear from our second-sourcing
partner.  Indeed, the comments about the wide acceptance of our chips being
enhanced by the second source is VERY true.  Potentially, Digital may be in
an excellent business position with this strategy.

     So, it comes down to working with business partners without ignoring the
potential of that partner to abuse the relationship.  If we can't manage such
a necessary business relationship, then we don't deserve to keep the 
technology we developed.  It would prove that we are too pusillanimous to 
compete in the global marketplace.

                                   Greg

    re .21
    	Dont leave out that Lincoln pays it's employees by "piece work"
    	too. 

    An instructor I had once stated that Lincoln Electric had an across the
    board profit sharing program.  His statement included the example of a
    janitor sweeping up new nuts and bolts, going to his/her supervisor to
    complain about the waste - because the waste was comming directly out
    of everyone's profit sharing check.
    

This news is GREAT !!  

The worry about Mistubishi learning our design secrets and eventually 
overtaking future designs are not a concern in my opinion due to :

1) We have no design secrets, Mitsubishi could today design their own processor
   that would outperform Alpha. The reason they do'nt venture in such a billion 
   dollar gamble is because without software and hardware market weight ( which 
   Mitsubishi does not posses ) their chip is doomed. 

2) They will always pay us royalties for the architecture, if one day they will 
   radically change it in future designs to the point where royalties become 
   questionable then their chip will suffer the same fate listed in 1). 

It will be a better choice for them to keep the Alpha architecture intact 
( after all they too want it to succeed ) and focus their design efforts on 
Microcontrollers,DSP,Mulitmedia,graphics or maybe design changes for 
speed / yield enhancements. 

    The Mitsubishi alliance is good news.  It is not great news.
    
    It is good news because Alpha technology could not survive without a
    reliable second source for silicon.  It has now what should be a very
    reliable second source.
    
    It is not great news because Digital required more than a year since
    the initial Alpha announcement to identify a second source.  It looks
    as if no one else was willing to take the risk ("Markets!  Show me
    markets!").
    
    Also, we don't know exactly what Mitsubishi's plans are for Alpha.  The
    agreement, which allows Mitsubishi eventually to develop modified 
    designs, may be an excellent inspiration to improve the technology.  It 
    may also be an invitation to test the limits of the Alpha patents.  We 
    probably won't know until it happens.
    
    Mac

    The delay in getting a second source doesn't bother me.  I agree with a
    previous noter that points out that it's the first big sponsor that's
    the toughest.  Others will probably follow.
    
    Steve

    
    
    We definitely needed a heavy weight Alpha 2nd source but the agreement 
    looks like a Japanese bait and switch scenario.
    i.e. ramp your volume and profit up by their contributions then they 
         improve enough to pattern, and dump to gain market share at your
         inovation and expense.
    
    From the Boston Globe article:
     
    ...Linda Sanders, a spokeswoman for semiconductor marketing at Digital,  
    ...She said Mitsubishi would first begin selling chips based on
    Digital's design.  "Later on," she added, "they will be building and 
    selling the Alpha AXP microprocessor based on their design variation of it.
    
    This appears to me to be a short term win for Digital and a potential
    long term defeat depending on Pattern and Royalties clauses in 
    our agreenment with Mitsubishi.
    This could be great news is we did not give away the store.
    
    
    Re: .26   Makes some good points which may limit Mitsubishi's ability to 
              exploit Alpha against us. 
    
    
    Please, don't insult people with Japan bashing labels.  Economic
    history has documented many Japanese technology exploits and American 
    companies' short sightedness.
    
    Cheers,
    Paul

    Well, as far as "bait and switch" goes for grabbing technology, I wouldn't 
    call that Japanese.  I mean, there is Microsoft ...
    
    Steve

    
    re: .29
    
    Given Digital's economic history of the past three years, it's
    not clear that we had any choice but to take a short term view.  The
    risks are plain in allowing Mitsubishi to modify the design.  Without
    the second source, however, "improvements" to the design would
    likely be moot.
    
    Glenn

    	I've always assumed that the second source policy was to ensure a
    supply of components in the event of a catastophic event shutting down
    the primary source.
    
    	My questions are: 
    
    	-Are Alpha chips being (or can be) produced in our Ayr plant? If so,
    isn't this a second source fitting my interpretation (above)?
    
    	-The speed achieved in Alpha has been attributed to Digital's
    fabrication expertise. I recall seeing doubting comments from the industry 
    press when the clock speeds were announced, to the effect that "you
    can't do that". Why would we give details of this to a producer outside
    the corporation?
    
    	-Lastly, no anti-Japan intended, why not a domestic fabricator?
    What specifically lead to the selection of Mitsubishi?
    
    Phil

    	Re: .32

>    	I've always assumed that the second source policy was to ensure a
>    supply of components in the event of a catastophic event shutting down
>    the primary source.
>    	-Are Alpha chips being (or can be) produced in our Ayr plant? If so,
>    isn't this a second source fitting my interpretation (above)?
        
        That's why Digital would want to Digital plants building the
        chips, but potential customers like to see two companies
        building the chip to avoid problems if a sole-source company
        goes bankrupt or decides to start raising the price.  Digital
        has been looking for a second company to produce the chips in
        order to make customers feel better and more likely to buy.

>    	-The speed achieved in Alpha has been attributed to Digital's
>    fabrication expertise. I recall seeing doubting comments from the industry 
>    press when the clock speeds were announced, to the effect that "you
>    can't do that". Why would we give details of this to a producer outside
>    the corporation?

        First, anyone can do it, but they would get a higher error rate. 
        Second, all manufactures can improve (especially once they see
        what Digital can do) so any advantage is only temporary anywhere
        (unless we keep improving as well).  Third, we want a second
        source so customers don't consider this just a proprietary chip.

>    	-Lastly, no anti-Japan intended, why not a domestic fabricator?
>    What specifically lead to the selection of Mitsubishi?

        Did you read the previous replies?  As one of them mentioned,
        Digital isn't really an American company, it's an international
        company, so `domestic' doesn't have a lot of meaning.

        From what I heard (keep in mind that I don't make chips) the
        reason it took so long to find a second source was because
        manufactures kept saying `we can't make those with a low enough
        error rate to make a profit'.  I suspect that Mitsubishi was the
        first to believe that they could make the chips.

        					B.J.

    
    		My first reaction was much the same as with many of the
    others here....Why Japan?   And yet there are many viable reasons why
    not the least of which is there might not have been any interested U.S.
    company's.  I do think that with Mr. Bob Palmer's history in this
    market that I, for one, will give him the benifit of the doubt.  I am
    sure that all these questions were asked and weighed before agreeing to
    this decision.
    
    
    Dave

>    	I've always assumed that the second source policy was to ensure a
>    supply of components in the event of a catastophic event shutting down
>    the primary source.
 
   This is only a small part of the picture.  Industry wide acceptance of an
   Architechture that we call AXP is only demonstrated by MAJOR players making
   MAJOR commitments to proliferation of our licensed technologies.  Take for
   example the application of a geographic based information system showing
   a map of OSAKA and you click on car reapir and get a list of 5 -15 second 
   video commercials of local repair shops with audio dubed in a choice of 7
   languages.  The CRT & console in your "MITSUBISHI" automobile developed
   and sold by one company in the Mitsubishi group, working in consort with
   other members who specialize in advertising and a third in video production,
   and others in the host of service centers that have the parts to fix your
   car.  We can make the way business operates in Japan be a test bed for
   enabling technology.  In the words of Robert Palmer "to foster innovation
   and competitive pricing"  are the real reasons for second, third, fourth
   source access.     
>>    fabrication expertise. I recall seeing doubting comments from the industry 
>>    press when the clock speeds were announced, to the effect that "you
>>    can't do that". Why would we give details of this to a producer outside
>>    the corporation?

>        First, anyone can do it, but they would get a higher error rate. 
>        Second, all manufactures can improve (especially once they see
>        what Digital can do) so any advantage is only temporary anywhere
>        (unless we keep improving as well).  Third, we want a second
>        source so customers don't consider this just a proprietary chip.
      
   I would add to this.. "you can't do that....profitably"  It is not only 
   defect density (HLO term for "higher error rate") but cycle time and
   capaital equipment utilization for a tedious process has an opportunity
   cost associated with it.   Our R&D investments in FAB 6 etc are but a tiny
   fraction of the overall expenditures required to putting an AXP in everyone's
   pocket.  And the problem is that if $10 billion is the magic number and
   15 - 24 months is the market window  we have a slight barrier to entry in 
   making that happen unless we have lot's of folks sharing the risk, and profit.

   You are probably aware of the present mix of Digital business done
   in U.S. Europe and GIA, with GIA being the smallest piece.   It is easier to
   triple (or more) revenue of smaller pieces when you have DOMINANT partners
   and increase market share by growing the pie.    Think of all the AXP based 
   gear that can be sold and SI-services from DEC-Japan, DEC-Korea, etc to
   augment the customized nitch applications put into service by innovative
   applications that come from Misubishi.  Go get'em!!   
  

Knowing Japan's past history on how it obtains a market, I would wonder if
this partnership would prevent other companies from licensing ... or does
having a second source all that really matters?

    i dont want to make a rat hole, but there was a program on TV this
    weekend on how work in Japan companies is, and that some dies of 
    what they called 'over-work-syndrome', and that even though the
    companies seems successful, but the life of the workers they live i 
    thought is not healthy.
    work work work all day , 10 hours per day, 6-7 days per week, after a 
    while the fuse must blow and one will die or get sick from the
    stress and its complications.

    i think it is better where there is balance between work and
    recreational activities such as school, chess, parks, travel and such
    related matter.

    \bye
    \nasser

    re .37
    
    so? What does that have to do with who we pick as a second source?
    
    - Dave

>    What does that have to do with who we pick as a second source?

	The arrogance of this is astounding. What makes you think
	we had semiconductor manufacturers lined up at our door,
	begging for Digital to look favorably on their requests
	to be allowed to build AXP chips?

				Tom_K

When it comes to the "supply" of semiconductor manufacturers who fit the bill
as a second source I suspect that outside of the Japanese there aren't too many
who could even manage to qualify (or want to). First you need someone with
enough capital and capacity to build a new product using new technology. Then
you need someone who isn't likely to be your own competition before you start
(Could you imagine Intel putting up their hand to second source Alpha?). These,
and I'm sure other considerations, whittles down the field considerably and the
number of potential US-based companies doing this kind of work isn't exactly
large to begin with.

    Front page of the EE times had a story on Mitsubishi second sourcing
    Alpha. 
    
    This is great and much needed news. A third vendor would be excellent
    as well. Digital's hope is to compete with Intel and this is a big 
    step in the right direction. 
    
    For a good story on the Japanese check out Micheal Crieghton's 
    "Rising Sun" now in paperback. 

    The latest issue of Datamation has a cover story on Digital, Alpha and
    Bob Palmer.

    Palmer is quoted as saying "On alternate chip suppliers for Alpha:
    ...I Think that semiconductor vendors, clearly, are going to want
    this architecture to be established before they make a significant
    investment in supporting an alternate supplier of chips."

    So it seems like unlike other American semi-conductor manufacturers such as
    National Semi-conductor or Motorola, Mitsubishi
    seems like the only one willing to put their money where their mouth is.

    Nari

    

|For a good story on the Japanese check out Micheal Crieghton's 
|"Rising Sun" now in paperback. 

I got about a third of the way through it before I threw it away.

    
     This is not new.  SGI/MIPS has second source with NEC and Toshiba.
    HP has second sources Hitachi and Oki.  Sun has second source with
    Fujitsu.  Leading microprocessors are American.  Leaders in chip
    manufacturing yields are Japanese.  Maybe there is synergy here ?