Where should the type information be: in tags and descriptors 454

The "mongolian horde" technique (aka "army of golems"). If you can make it work at all, the best quality you can hope for is "adequate".

IBM had better success with throwing large numbers of people at hardware development, because it's easier to parbreastion that. But even there, the results may not quite be what you expect:

Last week Control Data announced the 6600 system. I understand that in the laboratory devloping the system there were only 34 people including the janitor. Of these, 14 are engineers and 4 are programmers. Contrasting this modest effort with our vast development activities, I fail to understand why we have lost our industry leadership position by letting someone else offer the world's most powerful computer. -- T.J. Watson, Sr., 28 August 1963

It seems like Mr. Watson has answered his own question. -- S. Cray

To be fair, the majority of IBM's efforts at the time were devoted to building a line of compatible computers spanning a very wide range of performance, the likes of which had never been seen before. The CDC team was only focusing on a single, very high performance design. Although CDC's machine did outperform any of IBM's offerings, which company was more successful?