[Info-vax] Poulson info from Dave Cantor

[JF Mezei]

John Wallace wrote:

> By the time you get to a system of that size you need a better OS than
> Windows, and quite possibly a better OS than Linux too, depending on
> needs. A few customers *might* also need more IO slots than Proliant
> can provide. 


Is there a reason why an X86 based server can't have as much memory or
bus slots compared to an IA64 based one ?

I suspect that if HP were to announce EOL of IA64 tonight, by tomorrow
morning, their web site would feature some 8086 servers that scale all
the way up to what IA64 offered.

IA64 started off as a preplacement for PA-Risc and then 32 bit 8086.
When it eventually came out circa 2001/2002, the 8086 had gone through
puberty and no longer needed a replacement, so IA64 was pitched as a HPC
chip with RAS features. It naver made it to commodity PCs and soon was
alaso widthdrawn from non-commodity PCs (aka: workstations).

Now, the 8086 has the same RAS features (namely, the memory
interconnect) and can also have the same boot console (EFI).  And IA64
is no longer a contender in the HPC market.

There isn't really much left as reasons/markets to justify the huge
development costs.

I guess HP makes enough money with HP-UX/Tandem/VMS systems to justify
the continued subsidy to Intel. But wouldn't the profits be greater if
they gave IA64 it coup de grâce and moved HP-UX and Tandem to industry
standard archittecture ?