C integral types [was Re: Semi-OT: Why Kids Can't use Computers] (fwd)

[Walter Dnes]

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 02:23:26PM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote

> The Itanium was a noble experiment.  It's just that (a) they didn't
> realize it was an experiment, and (b) they poured their resources into
> the x86 battle, starving the Itanium project, and (c) they took the
> wind out of the sails (sales?) of RISC processors.

  An old internet post with a cynical take on the "Itanic disaster".

> Is Microsoft responsible for Intel's Itanic disaster?
> Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 21 2006 @ 04:12 PM EST
> There was no Itanic disaster.

> Remember, when Intel started the Itanium bluff, they hand zero
> presence in 64-bit computing and very limited presence in high-end
> computing.  Leading 64-bit players were MIPS/SGI, Alpha/Dec,
> PA-RISC/HP, and yes, IBM and Sparc.
> 
> In fear of Itanium, SGI spun-off MIPS and became a Wintel reseller.
> Compaq feared Itanium would quickly kill DEC's Alpha and gave it to
> Intel when they bought DEC. HP redirected their hardware resources
> away from PA-RISC to their intel/itanium partnership.
> 
> Without laying out a single transistor, Itanium completely destroyed
> 3 of the 5 64-bit competitors; and Intel went from being a PC desktop
> brand to a wall-street-recognised leader in high-end computing.
> 
> Never was there a more successful bluff in business. I don't see
> how people can consider that a failure.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes-SLHPyeZ9y/tg9hUCZPvPmw at public.gmane.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists