On 3/4/06, Attila Kinali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 22:17:27 +0000 > Peter Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Or they could just take it, burn it into an ASIC and sell it, and no-one (us > > least of all) would be the wiser. > > For OGP, this wouldn't be a problem, but exactly what we > wanted: a chip with our design and full specs. > Traversal on the other hand would then have a founding problem. >
I think it might indeed be a problem for OGP. If Traversal is killed, OGP loses its centralized corporate wing. So you get OGC1 more cheaply. But what about OGC2? I think to function, the OGP would always need a corporate wing to do its corporate bidding. If it weren't called Traversal, it would be called something else. If Traversal can't make it, who would be foolish enough to make the same mistake in the future? Remember, Traversal lives and dies at the behest of the Open Graphics Project. It only pretends to be its own entity. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
