Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development
From: Larry Kilgallen (Kilgallen_at_SpamCop.net)
Date: 12/18/04
- Next message: Neil Rieck: "Re: Time to revive Emerald?"
- Previous message: Larry Kilgallen: "Re: HP exodus to Intel"
- In reply to: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Next in thread: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Reply: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Reply: CJT: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 17 Dec 2004 18:35:15 -0600
In article <41C37481.5050606@tsoft-inc.com>, Dave Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> writes:
> Larry Kilgallen wrote:
>> No, deferring knowledge of instruction length beyond the place where
>> the first byte is decoded.
>>
>
> Some very interesting bits of info. But to re-design the wheel, it isn't worth
> it. What I was thinking is if the information needed to set up production was
> available, and whether such would allow easily setting up production.
"Easily" is not the issue. "Profitably" is the issue. VAX had patent
protection. Today Itanium has patent protection. That is what motivates
a chip vendor to spend vast amounts of money. Those who point out AMD
as a stiff competitor to Intel should realize that Intel would rather be
making their money on Itanium where AMD is not a problem.
- Next message: Neil Rieck: "Re: Time to revive Emerald?"
- Previous message: Larry Kilgallen: "Re: HP exodus to Intel"
- In reply to: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Next in thread: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Reply: Dave Froble: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Reply: CJT: "Re: HP pulls out of IA64 chip development"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|