HP's The Machine kicks Microsoft to the curb in favor of Linux - TechRepublic (fwd)
Lennart Sorensen
lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org
Wed Jul 2 15:36:40 UTC 2014
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 12:04:06AM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> You need to break down "they". HP's goals and Intel's goals appeared
> to be different. And goals evolved.
>
> In the beginning, it was an HP project to replace their PA-RISC
> architecture with a big new idea: VLIW. They decided that they could
> not do the whole job, including fabrication, and partnered with Intel.
> Intel was always #1 in process engineering (making silicon fast).
>
> Intel appeared to have a different goals: to (eventually) replace x86
> with something in which they could keep out other suppliers (AMD,
> NatSemi, ...). And to have a seriously performant entry in the
> workstation and server races.
>
> Besides, x86 was crufty. Extending an architecture too many times is
> difficult. The rule of thumb is that you can do it once well (see
> Bell and Newell). 8008 -> 8080 -> 8086 -> 80286 -> i386 was already
> pushing it.
4004? 80186? 8085?
> Worse was the historical baggage from the IPM PC and PC/AT. Remember,
> EFI came out of the Itanium project. Look how long it has taken to
> land.
>
> I have a lot of respect for some amazing folks who worked on Itanium
> in the early days (Muchnick (HP), Fisher (ex-Multiflow), Rau
> (ex-Cydrome), etc). Compiler technology was crucial.
>
> Many ambitious projects fail. Some have the goalposts adjusted.
> Failing fast is often a blessing. The Itanium has suffered from an
> extremely long failure -- 20+ years!
Well someone kept throwing money at it for some reason.
It did succeed at one goal. It killed a number of better CPU designs.
--
Len Sorensen
--
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
More information about the Legacy
mailing list