[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[JF Mezei]

Keith Parris wrote:

> Kittson occurs "deep into the current decade" and then there is 
> "continued development of further generations" later in the same 
> sentence. Ordering is implied.

If this is from the 2007/2008 contract, then "deep into current decade"
means that Kittson was originally planned for 2009. Which doesn't make
sense since at the time of the 2007/20078 contract, Tukwila wasn't out
yet, which would have meant release of Tukwila, Poulson and Kittson in a
2  year time line which is not realistically possible.

If this is from the 2010 contract adjustement, "deep into the current
decade" implies post 2015. With at least a 3 year gap between Poulson
and Kittson, it isn't clear there will be much interest left in IA64 by
the time Kittson comes out so.

There really isn't much motivation to really work on improving IA64
since IA64 is already dead in the market (and in contracts). The only
motivation is to execute contracts and fulfill promises of at least 2
more generations made by HP to customers.  What each generation provides
in terms of performance is not very important. And we saw this with Tukwila.