Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> ...can be regarded as a huge success...

So long as one puts big, fat "giga-money-losing" and "humiliating" disclaimers on "success", then yes.

Vs. - what if, instead of Itanium, Intel had more-quietly designed and delivered good, high-performance x86-64 CPU's? I'm thinking that, by bottom-line metrics, would have been a vastly more successful business strategy.



Well, that's what AMD was doing. Intel's pride couldn't let them legitimize that strategy.

Meanwhile, ARM was designing little low-power RISC toys that were obviously no danger to Intel at all.


Itanium was announced (and supposed to have shipped!) well before AMD announced x86-64


THIS. Per Wikipedia:

"AMD originally announced AMD64 in 1999[14] with a full specification available in August 2000"

vs.

"In June 1994 Intel and HP announced their joint effort to make a new ISA..."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: