| 1 |
On 2012-09-15, Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2012-09-15, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> From my understanding, someone correct me if I am off here, AMD sort of |
| 5 |
>> beat Intel to the 64 bit thing. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> After years and years of miserable sales, Intel finally gave up |
| 9 |
> flogging the Itanium pocessor family and abandoned the IA64 |
| 10 |
> architecture in 2011. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Oops, after some research on Wikipedia, it looks like that last bit is |
| 13 |
wrong. Intel still appears to be making Itanium parts (but nobody |
| 14 |
but HP cares). |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Itanium is no longer supported by Microsoft, RedHat, Oracle, SAP, and |
| 17 |
various other SW vendors (including Intel). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Most of the old Itanium server vendors (e.g. IBM, SGI, Dell) have also |
| 20 |
abandonded Itanium. It seems HP is still sticking with it and is, in |
| 21 |
fact, has paid Intel over half a billion USD to keep it alive -- small |
| 22 |
wonder HP is circling the drain. |
Archives