Farewell Unobtanium / Itanic, er I mean Itanium?

Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Sysman replied

31 March 2011, 08:09
Originally posted by Sysman View Post

I understand that it was so highly touted before it was reality that other manufacturers were waiting for it rather than continue development with their own solutions. If I remember correctly the Itanium was going to be Intel's 64 bit solution and it was AMD who brought us x64.

Tee hee:

Itanium Sales Forecasts over the years

Last edited by Sysman; 31 March 2011, 08:16.
Leave a comment:
Sysman replied

25 March 2011, 13:41
Originally posted by AtW View Post

Yeah, good riddance - cost billions of $$$ and all that was from sales of x86 and later x64 - frankly the whole project was a disaster - can't believe it took so long to admit it failed, some real high ups must have been involved.

Give us more cores of x64 - cheap!

I understand that it was so highly touted before it was reality that other manufacturers were waiting for it rather than continue development with their own solutions. If I remember correctly the Itanium was going to be Intel's 64 bit solution and it was AMD who brought us x64.
Leave a comment:
AtW replied

24 March 2011, 21:17
Yeah, good riddance - cost billions of $$$ and all that was from sales of x86 and later x64 - frankly the whole project was a disaster - can't believe it took so long to admit it failed, some real high ups must have been involved.

Give us more cores of x64 - cheap!
Leave a comment:
Sysman started a topic Farewell Unobtanium / Itanic, er I mean Itanium?

24 March 2011, 13:11
Farewell Unobtanium / Itanic, er I mean Itanium?

It is 10 years ago this summer that Compaq announced the EOL for DEC/Digital/Compaq's Alpha series in favour of Intel's Itanium. Is this Itanium's final death sentence?

From The Register: Ellison drops iceberg in front of HP's unsinkable Itanic

Oracle has announced that it has stopped development for all its software on Intel's high-end Itanium server processor.

...

This may not be a big deal for all of the other server vendors that have abandoned the good ship Itanic - IBM, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Unisys, Fujitsu, NEC, Bull, and others - but this is a huge deal for Hewlett-Packard, which runs its flagship HP-UX Unix operating system on Itanium-based Integrity servers.

I believe that OpenVMS (what's left of it) and Tandem's NonStop also run on Itanium. And so much for the poor Tru64 customers who were promised a port to Itanium which never happened, but were promised "We will help you to move to HP-UX".

I wonder if HP saw this coming with their purchase of Palm.
Tags: None