Itanium Solutions Alliance
From: JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot_at_teksavvy.com)
Date: 08/31/05
- Next message: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: Gamers"
- Next in thread: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: Alan Greig: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: Dan Foster: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 22:12:07 -0400
Intel is getting its IA64 customers to fund an Itanium Solutions
Alliance to help promopte the struggling alliance.
The article then moves on to more familiar territory, outlining why IA64
just hasn't caught on. (It isn't just the inquirer that has negative
spin on IA64).
A few interesting sentences:
"What happened here is Intel seriously underestimated the support the
marketplace would have
for an incompatible platform and believed 'if we (Intel) say it's
industry standard, everybody will come.' Clearly that didn't happen."
In line with that high-end positioning, Microsoft's planned update to
its Windows Server 2003 operating system--called R2--won't be available
for Itanium. Microsoft's rationale for the move is that R2 is geared
toward smaller servers. The Window Server 2003 successor due in 2007,
code-named Longhorn Server, will support Itanium, however.
This one is really telling:
Itanium hasn't yet reached heir-apparent status by most estimates.
HP--the server maker that has pushed the chip most aggressively--sold
$108 million in Itanium-based Unix servers in the second quarter of
2005, compared with $1.1 billion in the PA-RISC-based Unix servers
they're intended to replace, according to Gartner figures.
Here is an example of where the writer can easily make a statement into
an editorial by adding one word:
Intel's Itanium plans still extend years into the future.
Note the use of the word "STILL" in the above See, it isn't just the
inquirer that sees little future in IA64.
With numbers like this (the HP numbers) you wonder why HP is bothering
with IA64 at all. It really would be better for it to produce more speed
bumps for PaRisc and Alpha until the 8086 is ready for prime time.
The big question now is whether this effort to keep IA64 alive is Intel
driven, or driven by HP and possibly SGI to help justify their continued
reliance on that chip.
- Next message: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Previous message: JF Mezei: "Re: Gamers"
- Next in thread: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: QRo=DFert_G=2E_Schaffrath=22?=: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: Alan Greig: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Reply: Dan Foster: "Re: Itanium Solutions Alliance"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|