From: Muranyi, Arpad (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Feb 04 2000 - 13:24:38 PST
I agree that the word "model" may be improper to be used
together with IBIS. However, good luck trying to get
people off of the habit of calling these IBIS files models.
This is similar to expecting people to not say "LCD display"
(Liquid Crystal Display-display), etc...
Regarding your comment below your signature, I would like to
get some clarification. What are you referring to in the
"bait and switch tactic" in connection with IBIS? Working
for Intel and being a promoter of IBIS, I don't see ourselves
doing that. What are you talking about? Please explain!
From: Jim Freeman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2000 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : modeling languages (was: receiver jitter)
If "a _data_transfer_standard_, *not* a simulation
model prototype." as you say below, then the term of art
"models" that is used in the industry and first promoted
by Intel as such should NOT be used in connection with
the term IBIS.
P.S. I have refrained from any further comments on this
thread but revisionist history really syeams me. Intel
is practicing the basic bait and switch tactic with the
attitude propounded below.
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to email@example.com. In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP.
si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 20 2000 - 11:34:59 PDT