Ray Holt’s resume

B.S. Electronic Engineering, Cal Poly University-Pomona, Pomona CA
M.S. Computer Science, Santa Clara University, Santa Clara CA

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

CORNERSTONE BUSINESS SERVICES, Blanchard, OK
President/Owner
Business solutions consultant. Internet marketing & promotion.Software and hardware installation and troubleshooting. PC Training. Seminar speaker.

CORNERSTONE BUSINESS SERVICES, South Park, Pennsylvania
President/Owner
Business solutions consultant. Internet marketing & promotion. Seminar speaker.

CORNERSTONE COMPUTERS, Santa Clara California
President/Owner
Internet design and marketing, network sales and installations, microprocessor consulting.

GRAPHON CORP, San Jose, California (contract)
Director of Information Systems and Customer Services
Setup an accounting and manufacturing computer system network.

DIGITAL OPTICS CORP, Santa Clara, California
Director of Operations/Engineering
Developed a laser-based 3-D scanner for imaging applications.

HONEYWELL/SYNERTEK CORP, Santa Clara, California
Director of Systems Engineering
Microcomputer-based card and systems development and manufacturing.

MICROCOMPUTER ASSOCIATES, INC., Santa Clara, California
Founder/Executive Vice-President
Designed and developed the JOLT, microcomputer kit, the VIM and SYM single-board computers. Robot application of SYM. Published the Microcomputer Digest, the industries first 100% microcomputer publication. Developed prototype for Radio Shack TRS-80. Programmed the first microcomputer pinball game. Developed and taught Intel microcomputer-based seminars and workshops for Intel Corp.

COMPATA INC., Palo Alto, CA
Senior Consultant
Developed and taught Intel microcomputer seminars.

AMERICAN MICROSYSTEMS, INC., Santa Clara, California
Senior Systems Research/Development Engineer
Microprocessor designer for the AMI 7200 and AMI 7300 single-chip microprocessor.

GARRETT AIRESEARCH CORP, Torrance, California
Systems Research/Development Engineer
Designed the microprocessor chip set for the F14 “Tomcat” Central Air Data Computer.

PROFESSIONAL EDUCATIONAL COURSES

“Distributed Learning Over The Internet,” Asymetrix, 1997
“Developing Applications for Distribution Over The Internet,” Asymetrix, 1997
“Windows NT Systems Administration,” Microsoft Training, 1996
“Internet Software Tools and Market,” FTP Corporation, 1995
“Corporate Intranets: Uses and Configurations,” Ingram-Micro, 1995
“Making Better Connections: PC-to-Enterprise Networking,” SunSelect, 1993
“The Store Keeper-Retail Software,” Dealer Training, Streamlined Information Systems, 1993
“Windows Applications and Usage,” Dealer Training, Microsoft, 1993
“Netware: System Manager Course,” Novell, 1991

“Successful Business Management,” Hume Financial Educational Services, 1989
“Video Shop Software – Retail Software,” Dealer Training, SIS, 1989
“3+Open Network Installation and Administration,” 3-Com/Merisel, 1989
“Doing Business as a Corporation,” James Urquhart III Seminars, 1988
“Alloy: Networking Applications and Design,” Dealer Training, Alloy, 1985
“Local Area Networks,” American Institute for Education, 1982

“Up Your Own Organization: Starting/Financing a New Business,” Dible, 1974
“Engineering Course in MOS Technology,” American Micro Systems, 1974

“MOS Technology, Theory and Application,” Garrett Corp, 1969
“Theory of Computer Arithmetic: Algorithms & Design Of Digital Arithmetic Processors,”UCLA, 1969

PUBLICATIONS & CONFERENCES

“F14 ‘Tomcat’ Microprocessor Chip Set,” R. M. Holt, Vintage Computer Festival, 1998, Santa Clara, CA
“Y2K and Insurance Issues,” Panel Member, Certified Underwriters Chapter Meeting, 1998, San Jose, CA
“Y2K – The Year 2000 Problem,” Ray M. Holt, Seminar Developer and Speaker, 1997 – present
“Web Page Design,” Ray M. Holt, Seminar Developer and Speaker, 1996-present
“Introduction to the Internet,” Ray M. Holt, Seminar Developer and Speaker, 1996- present
“Business Opportunities for the Value-Added Reseller,” Speaker, VAR Business Conference IV, 1992, San Francisco, CA
“Starting Your Own Reseller Business,” 1992, a book on how to start your own computer reseller business.
VAR Finder Database, 1991, a software database cross-referencing over 2000 distributors, 6000 manufacturers and 350 product categories

MICROCOMPUTER DIGEST, trade magazine, co-publisher, 1976-78, published monthly, the first microcomputer industry trade magazine
“Applications of LSI Microcomputers,” R.M. Holt, G.W. Schultz and H. MacFarland, 1978, IEEE Computer magazine
“Tutorial on Microcomputer Structures,” M.R. Lemas and R.M. Holt, Symposium On Computer Architecture, 1975, University of Houston
“A Look at Microcomputers: A Tutorial Survey,” R.M. Holt and M.L. Lemas, 1974, Computer Design magazine
“Throughput Analysis of a Line Controller Using The Intel 8080 Microcomputer,” R.M. Holt, 1974, University Of Santa Clara
“Architecture and Organization of the AMI 7200: A New Breed Of Minicomputer,” R.M. Holt, IEEE Western Region Conference On Minicomputers, 1973, Honolulu, Hawaii
“MOS LSI Minicomputer Comes of Age,” G.W. Schultz and R.M. Holt, Fall Joint Computer Conference, 1972, Volume 41 Part II
“MOS Processor for the F14A Central Air Data Computer,” R.M. Holt, Garrett AiResearch Technical Report No. 71-7266, 1971

TRAVEL / CULTURAL EXPERIENCE

I have traveled extensively in Europe visiting over ten countries. I was invited to speak and teach on the following occasions.
I have had many technical discussions with international professors and students.

2001
“Impact of Microprocessors on Education and Society”
“F14 Microprocessor Design and Development”
Free University, Engineering College, Berlin, Germany

2001
“Early Microprocessor Design and Development”
Vintage Computer Festival, Munich, Germany

2000
“Introduction To Internet and Web Page Design”
Secondary/Post-Secondary Students
Bratislava, Slovak Republic

2000
Web Page consulting, TEMA Mission, Holland

1999
“Introduction To Internet and Web Page Design”
Secondary/Post-Secondary Students
Banska Bystrica, Slovak Republic

In spite of the above quotation made by the designers of the Intel 4004 (two years after the F-14 microprocessor) many people involved in the F-14 project were able to continue to apply their experience gained from this project and to richly contribute to the future growth and innovation in the computer and semiconductor fields.  Here are some examples.

Tom Redfern (Garret AiResearch) continued his work with National Semiconductor in CMOS design and was selected as one of the first National Fellows for design excellence.

Jim Kawakami (AMI) continued his work with AMD and became a top innovator and leader in microprocessor design.

Brian Schubert (AMI) continued his work with AMD and Intel in graphics chip design and is leading the Intel Graphics Division.

Some of Mr Holt’s previous speaking engagements are:

California State Polytechnic University (Cal Poly-Engineering Club), Pomona CA
Carnegie Mellon University (Computer Science), Oakland PA
Free University (Engineering), Berlin Germany
Jackson State University (Computer Engineering), Jackson, MS
Oklahoma Community College (Information Technology), Oklahoma City OK
Oklahoma State University (College of Engineering), Stillwater OK
Oklahoma University (Computer Engineering), Norman OK
University of Mississippi (Computer Science), Oxford, MS
University of Mississippi (Computer Engineering), Oxford, MS
University Professor Consortium, Munich Germany
Vintage Computer Festival, Munich Germany
Vintage Computer Festival, Santa Clara, CA
Vintage Computer Festival East, New Jersey

Mr Holt requests that his expenses be paid prior to his travels. His speaking honorarium is as follows:

High School students or younger. No honorarium.
Community College Students: $500
University and Technical Students: $1000
Adult Audiences or Conferences: $1500

This form goes directly to Mr Holt and can be used for non-speaking communication.

In 1968 the F-14 program was born with the Navy’s proposal for the VFX (Navy Fighter Experimental) and resulted in Grumman’s general design 303 (see below). The VFX required a fighter with a two-man crew with tandem seating, two engines, an advanced weapon system with a powerful radar plus the ability to carry a variety of long-, medium- and short-range high-performance air-to-air missiles and an internal gun. Furthermore, the VFX should be able to land on a carrier with a full armament load (if one considers the costs of todays weapons quite a reasonable requirement!).

Years before anybody thought of developing the F-14, in the early 1960’s the US Navy and US Air Force had planned to build a fighter that should meet the requirements of both the Navy and the Air Force: The F-111. The Navy version was the F-111B, nicknamed “Sea Pig” by Navy crews and test personnel, an 85,000 lbs experimental fighter aircraft that was build to carry the 1,000 lbs heavy AIM-54 Phoenix missile and the AWG-9 radar.
Missile and radar were a unique composition to shoot down aerial enemy targets 100 miles away. F-111B flight tests were not successful and killed several pilots. The aircraft was too heavy, too clumsy, too much a maintanance nightmare. Only 7 F-111B were produced before the program had been canceled in 1968. The AWG-9 radar and Phoenix missile would be installed in the F-111B replacement aircraft, the F-14A Tomcat. The Navy and Hughes decided to continue testing the AWG-9/Phoenix with the F-111B prototypes to ensure that the system was ready when the Tomcat was ready to fly years later.

As an incentive for the contractor to fullfill the requirements, the Navy put some penalties on the project if Grumman would fail on some of the contract guarantees:

* Empty Weight: $440,000 for each 100 lbs overweight
* Acceleration: $440,000 for each second slow
* Escort Radius: $1 million for each 10 nautical miles short
* Approach Speed: $1.056 million for each knot fast
* Maintainability: $450,000 for each extra maintenance man-hour per flight hour
* Delivery to Navy Board of Inspection and Survey: $5,000 for each day late

With this background and a good deal of knowledge on building Navy fighter aircraft, Grumman succeeded in delivering the F-14 on time, on cost and as an even better fighter than they contracted for! This is what the F-14 could have looked like … Early Grumman general configuration models of what could have become the Tomcat:

During the design process, some 9,000 hours of wind-tunnel testing were performed on some 2,000 different configurations and nearly 400 combinations of air inlets and exhaust nozzles! In 1968 the design studies of the Grumman engineers concentrated on 8 layouts before the E version became the winning design (See table below). Thoughts during the design process incorporated the behaviour during high speed (supersonic) flight, supersonic combat ceiling performance, trouble-free engine performance, engine growth potential and subsonic longitudinal stability. The fixed-wing version was rejected because of its weight, carrier suitability and because of its low-altitude performance. Some of the basic design background for the F-14 (and also for the F-111) was gathered using a German x-plane which was built during 1944! Click here to read more about it and view some photos of this test aircraft.

303-60    The January 1968 proposed aircraft: Podded Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing
303A     Nacelle Modification of 303-60: Podded Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing
303B     Design 303-60 updated for configuration comparison: Podded Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing (see above photo)
303C     Submerged Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing
303D     Submerged Engines, Low Variable-Sweep Wing
303E     Basically, the winning F-14 design: Podded Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing
303F     Submerged Engines, High Fixed Wing
303G     A fighter only version (AWG-10, 4 Sparrows) without Phoenix capability: Podded Engines, High Variable-Sweep Wing

When the initial design 303E was accepted, further improvements were made in the next design steps:

* Incorporation of Grummans convergent-divergent iris engine nozzles. Increased supersonic maximum afterburner thrust at no penalty in cruise fuel flow.
* Nacelles moved closer together and fuselage depth increased forward. Reduced wetted area and improved area distribution. Better sinle-engine control.
* Revised lines (reflexed trailing edge) of internacelle “pancake” area. Reduced negative supersonic zero-lift pitching moment and reduced supersonic trim drag.
* Wing area increased to 565 square feet from 505 square feet. Increased combat agility. Allowed use of simple hinged single-slotted flap, rather than complex double-slotted extensible flap. As a fallout, maneuvering flap is easily achieved.
* Reduced wing aspect ratio, from 8.15 to 7.28. Aspect ration 7.28 yielded minimum takeoff gross weight for Navy-specific (TS-161) fighter mission while still meetin TS-161 6-Phoenix Combat Air Patrol mission carrier-suitability requirements.
* Re-evaluation of wing bending moments. Considerably reduced design static wing bending moments.
* Addition of Mach Sweep Programmer Further reduced design static wing bending moments. Optimum sweep programming assured pilot of maximum combat agility he would lack with fixed-sweep combat detent or fixed-wing aircraft. Reduced engineering and flight test development costs.
* Incorporation of Direct Lift Control for carrier approach. Better control of approach glide path with greatly reduced angle-of-attack excursions. Reduced variability of deck contact conditions, such as attitude and sink rate.
* Incorporation of glove vane. Superior supersonic maneuverability. Reduced supersonic trim drag.
* Improved treatment of wing/nacelle relationships involving wing dihedral inboard and anhedral outboard. Better wing/nacelle sealing in all sweep positions. Improved mechanization of over-wing fairing covers.

The first flight of the #1 prototype F-14A took place on December 21, 1970. All in all, fourteen aircraft were used for the development programm, 12 of them instrumented. Of those 12, two were used for the development of the Hughes Phoenix Missile System at Hughes Aircraft Corporation at Point Mugu, CA. Six aircraft were used for airframe/engine testing at the Grumman facilities at Calverton, NY and four for avionic system development at Pt. Mugu. Five F-14s (of the six “airframe” aircraft) spent some time at Patuxent River, Maryland for carrier suitability trials and for structural, powerplant and performance demonstration. The fully proven F-14 was introduced to the fleet only 51 month after contract award!

Day 1, First Flight!

The photograph (click on it to view larger format picture!) shows #1 prototype shortly before its maiden flight on December 21st 1970. Pilot was Grumman chief test pilot Robert Smythe with project test pilot William Miller in the back seat. The first flight was made very late in the day, sometime around 4 P.M. In December on the East Coast of the US, it gets dark early, and by 5 PM it’s night-time. When #1 flew, the weather wasn’t the greatest either; marginal at best. Grumman needed to get first flight accomplished by the end of 1970 or else end up paying the Navy a fine for breach of contract (see above). With Christmas approaching, Grumman knew that many people will start using their vacation time to extend their Christmas Holiday. So it was a “now or never” feeling at Calverton! On 30 December 1970, on the aircraft’s second flight, the #1 Tomcat was lost due to failure of a hydraulic pump which caused a total loss of flight controls. The crew managed to eject safely and the aircraft crashed short of the runway at Grumman’s Calverton facilities in New York.

Thereafter flight testing began:

* 157981: 2nd prototype used for low-speed handling tests
* 157982: 3rd prototype used for non-destructive structural tests
* 157983: 4th prototype was the 1st F-14 with AN/AWG-9, used for AIM-54 evaluation
* 157984: 5th prototype used to demonstrate systems compatibility
* 157985: 6th prototype: Missile separation & weapons separation tests. #6 crashed on 20.06.1973: The aircraft was lost near Point Mugu when an AIM-7 pitched up on launch and ruptured a fuel tank, causing a fire which necessitated crew ejection.
* 157986: 7th prototype used as engine testbed, later used as F-14B-30GR prototype and then modified as F-14A(+) prototype
* 157987: 8th prototype for Navy evaluation tests. Aircraft crashed on 13.05.1974 after suffering an engine fire on ground at Patuxent River
* 157988: 9th prototype for AN/AWG-9 evaluation
* 157989: 10th prototype used for carrier qualification evaluation. Aircraft crashed on 30.06.1972 near Chesapeak Bay while practising for an airshow at Patuxent River
* 157990: 11th prototype used for non-weapons systems avionics tests
* 157991: 12th prototype (redesignated Prototype #1X) used for high-speed handling tests, modified for single-crew operation

Series production began and VF-124, the Fleet Replacement Squadron, received their first F-14A on the 8th of October 1972. VF-1 and VF-2 began equipping with the Tomcat in July 1973 with a first cruise on the new mount in September 1974.

This search engine brings up over 72,900 references to this work ( Gate Scout )

“The Road to the Future… Is Paved With Good Inventions”
We bring you 10 great ideas that made flying safer, easier, or just a whole lot more fun.
Air & Space Magazine, September 1, 2009

A Brief History of Computing (Ray Holt and a team from AiResearch)

Absolute Astronomy (Central Air Data Computer)

Central Air Data Computer (wikipedia)

Computer Collector Newsletter (The controversial birth of the TRS-80)

Computing Timeline 1950-1979 (June 1970)

Crucial Role Of Silicon Design In The Invention Of The Microprocessor

EDN, Steve Leibson’s Blog, “Intel Rewrites History”

F-14 CADC

F14A CADC Microprocessor – MP944

From Dust to the NanoAge (The microprocessor is a US-born boy!)

Great moments in microprocessor history (IBM – The history of the micro)

History of Computing (Ray Holt, working with his brother – Bill Holt …)

How To Make A Chip (This is the essay of how to make a Chip)

Intel 4004 isn’t the world’s first microprocessor (Saptarshi Purkayastha)

Microprocessor (wikipedia)

Microprocessor (tripAtlas)

Microcomputer Associates, Inc (wikipedia)

Microcomputer Associates (Jolt was designed by Raymond M. Holt)

New York Times Guide to Essential Knowledge (Introducing the Microprocessor)

Ray Holt (wikipedia)

Ray Holt (zoominfo)

Sci-Tech Encyclopedia: Microprocessor

Student Makes Technology History (OCCC Pioneer)

Technology – History Timeline

Today in Technology History (Read about Ray Holt)

Which was the first microprocessor and when was it introduced?

Who created the first microprocessor? (Yahoo Answers)

World’s first microprocessor (was a U.S. government project)

Vintage Computer Festival (Computing history is clear)

After 30 years, Ray Holt is getting his chance to claim to be the father of the microprocessor. Are there lessons to be learned for today’s entrepreneurs?

Dean Takahashi — Electronic Business, 1/1/1999

Ray Holt will always remember the computer chips he designed for the U.S. Navy’s F-14A “Tomcat” fighter jet three decades ago. The top-secret project was the one chance he got to work with his younger brother Bill.

The young college graduates worked day and night on an engineering team from June 1968 to June 1970, creating the jet’s main flight computer. A few months after the work was finished, Bill Holt collapsed. Within 10 weeks, he died from a brain tumor at the age of 24. “I’ve always been glad I had the chance to work with him,” says Holt, 53, a computer consultant from San Jose. “We got along better than at any other time.”

Holt has been revisiting that bittersweet memory ever since April, when he won a 30-year battle with the Navy to declassify the project’s records, which, he believes, provide convincing evidence for his claim to the disputed title, “father of the microprocessor.” Forced to be silent for three decades, Holt hopes that now he and his team will get credit for their work, which he considers an electronics industry milestone. Interviews with Holt’s co-workers and his own documents confirm that their work preceded the 1969-1971 efforts of Santa Clara-based Intel Corp. that turned the microprocessor into a business empire. “It was very frustrating,” says Holt, about keeping silent for so long. “I almost had to forget about it.”

Now that he can talk about it, Holt is discovering how difficult it is to find a place in history after the books have been written. He doesn’t want riches. Holt wants only to be acknowledged enough to be granted a place in the high-tech industry’s pantheon of notable inventors, or, at least, a footnote in some history of important innovations.

“No footnote,” says Intel

But former Intel engineers Marcian “Ted” Hoff, Federico Faggin and Stan Mazor begrudge him even the footnote. They share credit as the microprocessor’s inventors because they put a complete central processing unit on a single chip, although one that was aided by three support chips. Moreover, their “4004” chip set was inexpensive and marketable as a versatile, general-purpose device that could be used to control a wide array of applications (though it was mainly designed for a calculator). Hoff doesn’t feel that Holt’s accomplishments threaten to displace him in history. “I still consider the 4004 as the first microprocessor,” he says. “[It was] the first computer central processor on a chip. In our view, it had to be a single chip.”

If Intel’s cheap chip set was a Ford, Holt’s computer was more like a high-priced Cadillac, with three processor chips supported by three other chips. It had harder tasks to fulfill, such as calculating air speed, wing position and altitude simultaneously. Because of these mission requirements, Holt’s team couldn’t put everything on a single chip, and it would have been very difficult to build the processor as a cheap commercial product in 1970. Holt contends that doesn’t diminish his achievement, which could still be classified as the first microprocessor–one at least twice as powerful as Intel’s first device. “It’s like you make 500 Cadillacs and can’t tell anybody about it,” Holt says. “Then somebody else builds a million Fords and now people are asking me why I didn’t build a Ford. [Intel] changed the world with it, but they were not the first.”

An athletic-looking man standing 5 feet 10 inches tall with a salt-and-pepper beard, Holt has the demeanor of an easy-going teacher. For the past 15 years he has worked as a systems integrator. He also trains people on how to use the Internet.

In the late 1960s, Holt was a B student in electrical engineering at California State Polytechnic University College in Pomona, CA. There he took one course on computer logic design, and that helped land him a job at Garrett AiResearch Corp., an aerospace contractor in Torrance, CA. The first day on the job, someone walked him over to an aircraft assembly line and showed him a large box with lots of gears, cams and wires. “They told me, ‘your job is to put all of that into a computer,’ ” Holt recalls.

That year, 1968, Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore formed Intel. IBM announced the floppy disk. And Bill Gates turned 13. Working closely with an older engineer named Steve Geller, Holt guided the team through the design of six chips that formed the brains of the computer. He had the help of a smart mathematician named Bill McCormick, who developed the set of equations for calculating the data needed for controlling the F-14’s aerodynamics, and he had the support of other top engineering talent. The team designed three processor chips to do “parallel” calculations because Holt decided a “programmed-serial,” or small-bytes-at-a-time, approach, like that used by Intel, would have been too slow. Intel used this kind of parallel approach in a co-processor in the late 1970s.

Holt’s work went on day and night, 12 hours a day, seven days a week for almost two years. Yet Holt, then in his early 20s, was driven because he felt that he was pushing the state of the art, and he had a tight deadline as well. Simple by today’s standards, the F-14A’s 375-kilohertz computer was a difficult undertaking. The chip design was intricately laid out on papers that covered an entire room. Since computer time to run simulations cost $1,800-an-hour then, much of the computing was done by hand. The pressure to get it right was extreme. If the chip set didn’t work, the jet might crash. Furthermore, the jet’s primary contractor, Grumman Corp., would lose $5,000 for each day it was late.

Holt was efficient but diplomatic in dealing with the engineers on the project, recalls James Lallas, a programmer on Holt’s team. “I was the complete opposite,” says Lallas. “But when I talked to Ray, my blood pressure would go down.” Lynn Hawkins, a technician who wired mock-ups together, recalls working furiously to finish the second prototype. Holt had accidentally burned out the chips on prototype number one when he plugged a power supply in backwards. “The generals were on an inspection and we got [prototype number two] to work when they were about 50 feet away,” recalls Hawkins.

Holt made his deadline, finishing work on the first design in late 1969. The first prototype worked 99.99%, with only one wrong programming instruction out of 65,000. Holt fixed the chip and, two months later, in November 1969, the first working prototype was made. Holt’s six-chip design included two chips for memory storage. The first F-14A Tomcat took off on December 21, 1970, almost a year before the debut of Intel’s single chip microprocessor, the 4004.

While that is impressive, it doesn’t measure up to the resume of the 4004, which sparked the digital revolution that is still changing the world. Now that Holt has surfaced, industry experts are disputing the significance of his microprocessor. Faggin says that Holt’s flight computer, which would have been very expensive for non-aviation, commercial applications, probably would not have changed history at all. “If that is the case, then why is it important?” he asks.

Richard Belgard, a microprocessor expert in Saratoga, CA, says that Holt’s chip set is impressive, but its instruction set, which tells the processor what steps to perform, was somewhat limited to controlling an aircraft. Others say that Holt’s chip set doesn’t meet a common definition of a microprocessor: that is, a single-chip computer–a definition coined by Intel in the mid-70s. David Patterson, a professor of computer science at UC Berkeley, says, “No way is it a single-chip microprocessor.”

On the other hand, Holt says that the instruction set could be altered based on the chip configuration and application. Also, he notes that Intel Marketing Manager Hank Smith wrote in 1973 in an official paper for an engineering group, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, that a central processing unit could contain “up to four standard large-scale integration chips.” By that definition, Holt’s three-processor chips constitute a microprocessor.

Tour de force

Another microprocessor expert thinks that Holt’s work was extremely significant. Russell Fish, a Dallas-based computer architect who worked on early Motorola microprocessors, agrees with Holt that the F-14A chips contained a number of inventions, including self-testing capability. Fish says a company with this technology could have become an Intel. “By any definition, [Holt's design] was a technical tour de force of the first order,” Fish says.

In a way, Holt is lucky. He doesn’t have to deal with the hassle of being the first “usurper” to challenge Intel’s place in history. That dubious distinction goes to Gilbert Hyatt, a Southern California engineer who, in 1990, won a patent for conceiving the first microprocessor in 1968. The Intel trio of Hoff, Faggin and Mazor reacted with hostility to him. Hyatt was deemed a carpetbagger because he never built more than one prototype, and he was reviled for trying to extract millions of dollars of royalties from companies that built the industry. Hyatt’s insistence spurred others to come out of the woodwork.

Gary Boone, who created Dallas-based Texas Instruments Inc.’s first microprocessor in 1971, successfully challenged Hyatt’s patent, arguing that his chip couldn’t have been built to the specifications he outlined. The patent office canceled Hyatt’s patent, and an appeals court upheld the decision earlier this year.

Watching such shenanigans from the sidelines didn’t sour Holt’s fond memories about the project, which he associates with his last months with his brother. The two young men were very close and the loss was devastating. After his brother’s death, Holt found he couldn’t bear to go back to Garrett day in and day out.

The Navy never allowed Garrett (now part of AlliedSignal Inc., Morristown, NJ), to commercialize the chips or apply for patents on the technology. Holt wrote a design paper on the project for Computer Design magazine, but Garrett vetoed publication. Brice Maccubbin, a spokesman for the Naval Air Systems Command, says a thorough research of Navy records shows that the flight computer was not classified as a military secret, but it might have been a Garrett trade secret. But former Garrett team member Tom Redfern says “Ray isn’t crazy” when he says that the Navy didn’t want its secrets going out the door. “It was Navy classified,” says Redfern, now a technical fellow at National Semiconductor Corp., Santa Clara.

Holt put his design notebooks in a closet, but he tried to use his experience in commercial markets. He decided to move north, where he took a job at Pocatello, ID-based American Microsystems Inc. (AMI), now a subsidiary of Japan Energy Co. AMI had fabricated the flight computer’s chips. The distance helped put the pain of his brother’s death behind him. But Holt wasn’t destined for another milestone. After designing two more microprocessors, the AMI 7200 and 7300, AMI shut its microprocessor division in 1972, declaring its future was in custom chips.

Thrown out of work, Holt co-founded a small company, called Microcomputer Associates, that trained engineers how to design systems that used Intel’s 4004 microprocessor. The job was not the same challenge as designing microprocessors, a let-down for someone who had invented something superior, but it paid the bills. He also designed several unique computer boards including the JOLT microcomputer kits, the SYM, a single-board computer, and he programmed the first microprocessor-controlled pinball game.

In the late 1970s, Holt dropped out of the design rat race. He was tired of “going to work when it was dark and coming home when it was dark.” He and his wife, Lynda, a teacher, were raising three sons. Always aware of his brother’s fate, he shifted to consulting so he could spend time with his family. He began helping people install and run computer systems, a job that he continues to this day.

In 1977, Holt founded the Christian Athletic Association, an athletic youth league. He devoted countless hours of volunteer time to the league. “The thing that is unusual about Ray is that he poured his life into something else when he could have become a millionaire with his trade,” says friend Ron Van Groningen, a San Jose resident. This work was a consolation when he saw others get credit for the microprocessor.

Holt tried to get the Navy to declassify the chip information in 1985, since, by then, the chips were obsolete and the newer models of the F-14 no longer used his computer. But without explanation, the Navy denied his request. “I was pretty angry and upset for some time,” Holt says. But Lynda Holt says she kept encouraging her husband to try again with the Navy, even though she didn’t know why it was important to him. “It was like he was outside looking in, when he should have been in,” she says.

Mark Holt, Ray’s 33-year-old eldest son, says his father honored the Navy’s request to keep the secret. He only learned about his father’s accomplishment a few months ago. “I knew he did the brain of the Tomcat,” Mark says. “I can imagine how difficult it was for my dad. He had to bite his tongue and wait, and meanwhile all these other people became demigods.”

Holt says he gave up trying to change the Navy’s mind and became absorbed in his work and the youth league. His son Mark believes that decision vastly improved their family life. “I saw a lot of families fall apart because people made wrong [career] decisions,” Mark says. “Our house was a gathering place when Dad started the youth league. In the long run, that was a bigger accomplishment.”

Declassified

In April 1997, Holt appealed to the Navy again. This time, he consulted with his local congresswoman, Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat representing San Jose. With her assistance, Holt got to the right people in the Navy. This time, when he reached the Navy Captain in charge, “he laughed and said ‘Sure, we could declassify it.’ ” A year later, the Navy sent him a set of documents chronicling the chip’s invention, with a time stamp that said “approved for publication.”

Some of Holt’s records are still secret, pending approval from his former employer. Attorneys for Garrett have changed frequently, and the latest one said he had little time to review the materials. The company declined comment. Relieved he can talk about it, Holt has been having fun telling friends and family, and is gratified that they have no doubts about his honesty. “I was a little shocked when Ray told me,” says James Hook, a close friend. “He was very good about keeping it bottled up inside him for all those years. He worked like a dog, but I didn’t know he was there at the beginning [of that technology].”

Holt had a chance to explain his project publicly for the first time on September 26, 1998, at the Vintage Computer Festival in Santa Clara. A crowd of about 40 people, including some former members of the team, attended his presentation.

Holt’s son Mark has told his friends about his father’s accomplishment, but he understands what his father is up against. “It’s a big problem to fight 30 years of history,” he says.

Dean Takahashi is a technology reporter based in San Jose.

By Dean Takahashi
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
September 22, 1998

For years, three former Intel Corp. engineers have been known as the “Fathers of the Microprocessor,” the invention that launched the digital revolution.

Now another determined engineer says he deserves the title.

Raymond Holt, a 53-year-old computer consultant from San Jose, Calif., says that in 1969 he and a team of 25 engineers created the first microprocessor, for the U.S. Navy’s F-14A “Tomcat” fighter jet, at a time when Intel’s effort was just beginning. It wasn’t until 1971, he points out, that Marcian “Ted” Hoff, Federico Faggin and Stan Mazor integrated the basic elements of a computer onto a single silicon chip, creating a device that now sells billions of units a year.

Because Intel never applied for or received a far-reaching patent on the microprocessor, the company left itself and the engineering trio vulnerable to people who keep surfacing to say they got the idea first. Messrs. Hoff, Faggin and Mazor have heard such claims before.

“You know the saying, ‘Success has many fathers,’ ” fumes Mr. Faggin, who now runs a chip-design company in Santa Clara, Calif.

Collaborative Nature

Indeed, the collaborative nature of the invention is the reason company lawyers back then didn’t think the three engineers had anything to patent, Mr. Hoff recalls. It is problematic to call the microprocessor an “invention,” he says, when “every invention rides on the shoulders of past inventions.”

The microprocessor stems from the transistor, which was invented in 1948 by researchers at Bell Labs, now a Lucent Technologies Inc. unit, and from the silicon chip, known formally as the integrated circuit, which Intel’s founder Robert Noyce and Jack Kilby of Texas Instruments Inc. invented in 1958-59.

It was only a matter of time, Mr. Faggin says, before the computing engines of the refrigerator-size minicomputers could be squeezed onto a single silicon chip.

Mr. Holt, who directed the F-14A flight-computer-chip design team with another engineer, Steven Geller, kept the nature of his achievement quiet all these years because, he says, his work was classified by the U.S. Navy. “We were thrilled [at the discovery], but we couldn’t tell anyone,” Mr. Holt says. At the time, he worked at a Southern California aerospace firm, Garrett AiResearch Corp. which is now part of AlliedSignal Corp. Today he is a self-employed consultant who assembles computers and trains people to use them.

Mr. Holt wrangled for decades with the Navy and his former employer to declassify and release the documents that back up his claim. Finally, in 1997, with the help of his congresswoman, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D., Calif.), the Navy did.

Claim Disputed

The former Intel engineers dispute Mr. Holt’s claim. They say their achievement was putting a complete computer on a single chip. Their invention was inexpensive and marketable as a versatile, general-purpose device that could be used in everything from toasters and hearing aids to personal computers. By contrast, Mr. Holt’s solution was bulky, they say, requiring three processor chips and three support chips. It had harder tasks to fulfill, such as simultaneously calculating air speed, wing position and altitude. So Mr. Holt couldn’t have competed with them on cost. As such, Messrs. Hoff and Faggin say, Mr. Holt’s chips wouldn’t have changed history, even if anyone had known about them.

“There were lots of people exploring chip technology,” recalls Mr. Hoff, now a litigation consultant in Los Altos Hills, Calif. “But we were the first to put a computer’s central processing unit on a single chip. And we did it at a cost that could lead to very high volumes.”

But Mr. Holt says a microprocessor doesn’t have to be on one chip, and argues it isn’t fair to let a biased party such as Intel define which chips are microprocessors and which aren’t.

Russell Fish, a former Motorola Inc. chip designer in Dallas, has reviewed Mr. Holt’s work and believes it was indeed a microprocessor, and far more advanced than anything else at the time.

“It’s unfortunate this was classified,” said Mr. Fish. “The company that had this technology could have become Intel. It could have accelerated the microprocessor industry at the time by five years.”

Narrow Uses

Others disagree, saying Mr. Holt’s chips were designed for very narrow uses and performed better because he opted for an expensive solution, putting a processor on three chips instead of one.

“It was meant to keep an airplane flying,” says Richard Belgard, a microprocessor expert in Saratoga, Calif., who has reviewed Mr. Holt’s designs. “It was very innovative for the time and a good technical achievement. But I wouldn’t call it a microprocessor.”

Mr. Holt is far from alone in claiming paternity. Lee Boysel, founder of Four Phase Systems Inc., a Silicon Valley computer company acquired by Motorola Inc. in the late 1970s, says his team created the first microprocessor in 1969. Although his critics also say that his chips weren’t truly microprocessors and that they were sold only as parts of larger computers, he received belated recognition in 1996 at an industry event honoring computer pioneers.

Another Claimant

Gary Boone, a former Texas Instruments engineer, also sought the title. In 1971 he invented TI’s version of the microprocessor, which served as a calculator’s brain, and received the first patent for one. His collection of patents was useful in defeating the claims of Gilbert Hyatt, another late claimant, who surfaced in 1990. Mr. Hyatt was widely criticized as a carpetbagger because he never built more than one prototype, yet he, too, received a patent and tried to get millions of dollars in royalties from companies that built the industry. The patent was overturned.

Mr. Holt says his motivation isn’t money. The Navy never allowed his employer to commercialize the chips or apply for patents. He has no legal basis to extract royalties from microprocessor manufacturers.

The Navy now claims that Mr. Holt’s work wasn’t classified after all and suggests what Mr. Holt really needed was approval from his former company for release of records. Garrett officials say they aren’t sure what occurred, because those familiar with the case are no longer at the company.

This week Mr. Holt will officially launch a campaign to make his name. On Saturday he will be a featured speaker at a gathering of Silicon Valley computer buffs, the Vintage Computer Festival in Santa Clara, Calif., where he will be joined by members of his original team and publicly discuss his invention for the first time. He has put up a Web site with position papers and documentation that support his claim.

“I’m probably too late to be in the history books,” Mr. Holt concedes soberly. “But maybe I’ll be a footnote.”

While I was a grad student I worked at Hughes Aircraft on the computer for the radar system, starting in 1971 or 1972, so it brought back old memories.

Notice that he has lots of references to microprogramming in the document, which is typical of that era. (The aerospace computers I did were microprogrammed too.) The word “microprocessor” was used before the 4004 to mean the processor in a microprogrammed computer by some people of the time, so its not shocking to see the word microprocessor in a document of that era. In kind of used the term ambiguously, but it was a single chip CPU.

What this document describes is a microprogrammed set of custom LSI chips that can configured into multiple configurations and then microprogrammed, apparently in binary, to perform some application.

I think the minimum system is has 3-4 chips for the CPU, but I’m not positive from the stuff I read, but you could use many more to get more performance. It depends whether you include the ROM (microcode memory) and the RAM (“RAS”) as part of the CPU. Then it would be at least 2 more chips (5-6 total) in the CPU. Its plausible to include them since the RAM only had 16 words, so its like a register file, and the microcoded CPUs of the time would include the ROM in the CPU. His designed scaled, so there could also be lots more chips in his computer, without it being a multiprocessor. The designer just had to write the microcode that made it all work.

You should classify it as a microprogrammed special purpose computer, using a variable number of custom chips packaged as DIPs that could provide good performance in a small footprint. A classic aerospace thing to do, although most aerospace engineers of the time would design computers using standard TTL chips to reduce development costs.

I agree that its likely that the 4004 wasn’t fast enough; it had to fit into a single chip, and that meant sacrificing performance to make it fit. Holt’s used the technology to solve a fixed problem, and that problem wasn’t a desktop calculator (which led to the 4004) but signal processing for the F14A.

No way Holt’s computer is a microprocessor, using the word as we mean it today. Arguing that it is simply revisionist history, trying to claim a glory that isn’t deserved. Unless there is some patent deal going on, I don’t know why people would do this. Holt must understand the real issues; he looks to be a good computer engineer.

Hughes actually did a wafer-scale integrated CPU a couple of years later, which I worked on, and its was probably one of the first real ones, but who cares? There was no path from it to anything that had commercial impact, and its not like engineers at commercial companies were studying aerospace computers to get ideas to steal and put them in their commercial computers.

Dave