At 08:32 AM 10/31/99 -0800, James Paul wrote:
> All,
>
> I use to work for TI who came up with Bubble Memory, and there
> were four main factors effecting it's downfall.  I've listed
> them here.
>
........stuff elided

A very useful analysis of the proximate cause of bubble memory downfall.
I am also a former employee of TI and would like to add a couple of
strategic notes on the problems of magnetic systems.

In the late 1950's and 1960's, TI had grand plans along a number of lines,
including a variety of magnetic systems.  At that time I had serious
reservations about the ultimate success of any of these (and expressed
them in various planning meetings) for a couple of reasons:

        1.  magnetic systems intrinsically have no gain (as opposed to
        semiconductor techniques, and would therefore always require both
        drive systems of some complexity and read systems of some complexity.

        2.  the energy storage levels of magnetic systems is also very low
        and the read amplifiers would therefore always have to be finely
        tuned.  (Note: semiconductor memories now use very low signal levels
        but in the 1960's, they did not.  Amplifier techniques have been
        developed over time, but in the 1960's were not possible.)

        3.  the amount of money being spent on magnetic systems was being
        swamped by the amount of money being spent on semiconductor technology
        by about 100:1.  It follows therefore that (barring a true invention)
        magnetic technology would also lag behind semiconductor technology.

Thus the demise of not only bubble memories, but all other flavors of
magnetic memories and logic.

Bob McClure
During