3 ms·
Given the ambitious plans of making ia64 THE architecture for high-end servers, that was an EPIC failure (painful pun fully intentional...). About the only (ma
by krylon 10y ago
Given the ambitious plans of making ia64 THE architecture for high-end servers, that was an EPIC failure (painful pun fully intentional...).
About the only (major) vendor that uses Itanics is HP, and when Intel decides they no longer want to build them, HP is in trouble, unless they manage to get The Machine ready first, which I am not overly optimistic about (but happy to be proven wrong).
- ghaff 10y agoHPE has already largely switched its Itanium-based product lines to x86.
- krylon 10y agoThanks for the info, I did not know that.
- microtherion 10y agoWhile the Itanium as such was a big failure, it may have been a strategic triumph overall, as several RISC vendors scaled back or stopped their own efforts in anticipation of switching to Itanium. Once Intel decided to switch to x86-64, it does not look like they paid a big price to catch up (thanks to cross licensing, they could easily get the IP, and they still had their manufacturing strengths), so it's not clear to me that Intel faced ANY disadvantages in the long run (as opposed to their partners).
- gaius 10y agoYep Itanic killed SGI for example. MIPS are still going tho'!