[Info-vax] If I wanted to get there, I certainly wouldn't start from here

[JF Mezei]

dooleys at snowy.net.au wrote:

> For any X32 systems that are running up against the 4GB memory limit,
> then an upgrade to X64 is probably the safer option, but no longer
> cheaper,
> while the upgrade to IA64 will provide better performance and
> scalability.

Why would IA64 blades be any more scalable than 8086 blades ? Aren't
blades relatively simple "computers on a board" and putting multiple
blades in a box gives you multiple separate computers as opposed to one
large multi processor box (like Galaxy class machines or HP's superdomes).

And with the 8086 now at 64 bits, has it not broken free from the 4gig
memory limit ?

I am curious to know why independant customers would really choose IA64
over 8086 to run Windows. (by "independant", I mean customers who don't
get special deals from HP to get free IA64s in exchange for some
publicity, as has happened to large supercomputing sites).

Considering that Windows on IA64 has a very very small subset of
applications compared to Windows on 8086, unless your application makes
intensive use of a type of calculation where IA64 is better than 8086,
are there really any benefits to running Windows on IA64 ?

For Linux, much of the software is open sourced and you can send time
recompiling it on IA64 if you really want it. But with the Windows
software being proprietary, you don't have the option to generate your
own binaries.