iAPX432: Gordon Moore, Risk and Intel’s Super-CISC Failure

Re:iAPX432: Gordon Moore, Risk and Intel’s Super-CISC Failure by sliken on Sunday April 02, 2023 @03:11PM (#35414027)

Actually, they did. Intel promised aggressive delivery schedule, performance ramp, and performance. The industry took it hook, line, and sinker. While AMD decided not to limit 64 bit to the high end and brought out x86-64.

Sun did a port IA64 port of solaris, which is definitely an itanium side bet.

HP was involved in the IA64 effort and definitely was planning on the replacement of pa-risc from day 1.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:iAPX432: Gordon Moore, Risk and Intel’s Super-CISC Failure by davidgay on Sunday April 02, 2023 @05:14PM (#35415291)

> HP was involved in the IA64 effort and definitely was planning on the replacement of pa-risc from day 1.

As my memory remembers and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium agrees, Itanium originated at HP. So yes, a replacement for pa-risc from day 1, but even more so...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:iAPX432: Gordon Moore, Risk and Intel’s Super-CISC Failure by rodgerd on Sunday April 02, 2023 @05:32PM (#35415472)

Another way to look at the Itanic is that HP somehow conned Intel into betting the farm on building HP-PA3 for HP. Which is pretty impressive.

[ Parent | on HN ]