Re: Question about acronym IPF
From: JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca)
Date: 04/14/03
- Next message: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "XDM problems (TCPIP 5.3)"
- In reply to: Tom Linden: "RE: Question about acronym IPF"
- Next in thread: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Reply: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vl.videotron.ca> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 01:40:02 -0400
Tom Linden wrote:
>
> Itanium Processor Family. Pretty small family, however.
OK Thanks.
Second question: It was my impression that "Itanium" was to IA64 was Pentium
was to 80x86. Just a brand name to a "current" set of chips implementing an
architecture. The First IA64 wasn't an Itanium, it was a Merced, right ?
Does this mean that Intel commits to keeping "Itanium" brand name for its IA64
architecture for the remaining life of that chip ?
- Next message: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "XDM problems (TCPIP 5.3)"
- In reply to: Tom Linden: "RE: Question about acronym IPF"
- Next in thread: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Reply: Bill Todd: "Re: Question about acronym IPF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|