Talk:Codex Corporation

Codex Corporation was a communication products company, bought by Motorola in the 1970s, which pioneered high-speed communications products including dialup modems and cablemodems. What remains of Codex Corporation has been split between Vanguard Managed Solutions (http://www.vanguardms.com) and Motorola's 'Connected Home Solutions' division. Vanguard continues the classic Codex/Motorola product line while Motorola embraced the Broadband equipment.

There should be discussion regarding Codex Corporation's "Cape Project" while under the Motorola guise, as well as its refusal to admit that it was part of Motorola - declaring the huge campus in Canton, Massachusetts it created in the 1980s as "Codex Corporation World Headquarters" much to the chagrin of its parent company.


 * By the time the "World Headquarters" was built, the company had seen the writing on the wall, portending the demise of the "high-speed" modem (then 56k) and had failed to settle on a new market to serve. Their LAN offering was based on a cheaply conceived and poorly executed RS-232 terminal server (the "Economical Entryway") which used a notoriusly noisy chipset on a double-sided circuit board with serpentine ground and power traces. By the time they went to a four-layer board with proper power and ground planes for noise suppression, the product had already been ejected from enough customers' sites to lose Codex any credibility it had in the LAN market.


 * The "Cape Project" was a boondoggle with about a six-month cycle of concept/revision/cancellation/new-concept feeding into Codex's notoriously long product development cycle. Did it ever make it to market? Did it ever sell a single copy?


 * anonymous contributor —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.118.246.143 (talk) 00:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Thanks, but a more relevant question for Wikipedia is "was there ever anything published about them"? If so, it needs to be cited, since personal memory is not considered a verifiable source for an article. Anyway, I will propose merging into one article instead of two bad ones and a red link. W Nowicki (talk) 17:32, 7 August 2013 (UTC)