Linux Leads MS in Itanium Support

lizrd writes "The New York Times is reporting (yeah, yeah, you gotta sign to read it) that several Linux distros will be shipping stable versions of Linux for Intel's new 64-bit Itanium chip on the day that it is released to the public. Microsoft however will not be supplying a version of Windows for Itanium until sometime in the fall of next year, several months after the expected May release of the new processor."

Comments

Re:Good news for Linux on the Server Market

[Bill Currie]

The beauty of Linux is that it doesn't have to target just the server market (what is Linux anyway? Surely not Red Hat?:). Those that are interested in developing Linux's server capabilities do so, as with those interested in the desktop. There is no conflict of interest/resources because one side is more or less unavailable to the other anyway (ie, someone interested in working on Linux's desctop prospecs will not, in general, be well suited to working on the server aspects). And when you get kernel specific, improvements on one side generally help the other.

There are a lot of hightly specialised Linux distros out there (check out the distros page on lwn.net) with all sorts of uses (routers, terminals, servers, workstations, ...). There is no real shortage of resources for Linux developement. When something new is needed, it's generally done by the group that needs it which is often a new group, not an old one abandoning their previous project.

Bill - aka taniwha
--

Here is the NEWS.com version of the story

[Gryphon]

No login required!

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4236527.htm l

...and the problem is?

[Tin Weasil]

Okay, so Intel is about to ship it's Itanium, and Microsoft doesn't have an OS to power the new architecture. But Linux is ready to support the new chip...

...hmmm. I just don't see a problem here.

Re:And the simple reason is...

[barracg8]

When wasn't the first release of any Intel processor greatly overpriced?
Anyways...

• unproven processor that's incompatible with just about everything that's been built up in the PC-clone era of the last 19 years.

Uh.... how incompatible.... in so mach as it runs any x86 code, back so far as the 8086 back in the 70's? hmmm....

• It remains to be seen if the Itanium is really where personal computing is headed.

IA64 is definitely not intended for the personal computing market - at least not for a long time yet. This is a server processor, and Intel already have SGI & Sun lined up with designs based around the IA64. MIPS & Sparc may not be dead yet, but there is more movement from Intel's most direct competitors, towards this product, than any other processor they have previously released.

• Moving to an entirely new processor *family*, not just the next generation of what's currently available, is not to be taken lightly.

The IA64 architecture is a rare example of an easy transition between ISAs. The processor supports both the new VLIW/EPIC instruction set and the IA32 instruction set. For the OS writers, they can have a mix of 32 & 64 bit code running on the machine, to the extent that a 64 program can have its system calls serviced by 32 bit exception handlers, and vice-versa. So far as application software, a user can run new 64 bit application software alongside legacy applications that they cannot port to 64 bit. There are few easier ways to escape from the headache of the x86 instruction set.

• This is doubly true when the benefits of such a change are not at all obvious.

In the server market, the 32bit address space is already becoming a problem. (You can buy yourself a linux box with 4gb ram today).

(Score:5, Informative) for the parent post? In reality it is probably a subtle Troll.

cheers,
G