The first aspect of the research that should be pointed out is the important aspect of open-ended design. In this implementation the user of the machine will be able to change and modify the current functions and programs of the machine in a more feasible and generally applied manner. In other words, given the synchronicity in programming techniques and architecture of an open-ended machine, the engineering and manipulation of the applications and software or hardware run or implemented or upgraded on the machine will be applied more quickly and efficiently as a result of being open-ended and more manageable. The author proposes here that this aspect is most important for standardization and lucidity in implementation. Of course, it goes without saying that the general motivation for computer design and architecture has concomitance in feasibility and "user-friendly" generalities. When the author introduces the idea of general-purpose functionality, he attempts to realize a sort of logical provenience in dictation of style in architecture of the System/360. This, of course, is well defined in stating again that the smaller components that make up the greater system should be defined and acquired first. By doing this, the system has a solid base from which to begin defining the more intrinsic values accumulated by higher-level machine design. Such things as outlined are code-independence, individual bit manipulation, general addressing, and I/O control. Efficiency and intermodel compatibility are also inherent in system design as outlined by the author, however I believe that the two are very closely interrelated. The intermodel design must be outlined around efficiency in implementation, and vice versa. Herein, should one follow from the other, the entire line of the System/360 from IBM would grow in efficiency and compatibility. Programs dependent on one machine in the series should run according to trend and ...