Slashdot Mirror
Linus Has Harsh Words For Itanium
Anonymous Coward writes "As a follow up to the earlier story "Intel: No Rush to 64-bit Desktop"... In words that Intel are likely to be far from happy with, the Finnish luminary has stuck the boot into Itanium. His responses to some questions on processor architecture are sure to be music to AMD's ears. Linus, in an Inquirer interview concludes: "Code size matters. Price matters. Real world matters. And ia-64... falls flat on its face on ALL of these."" Of course, Linus works for a chip maker ;)
Linus being opinionated and brash? Never!
The best architecture is still VAX. Clearly string operations at the processor levels is what any procesor needs to be the best and fastest ;}
Of course, Linus works for a chip maker
And if trends continue, it could be Old Dutch.
Netcraft confirms it: Itanium is dying.
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleagured Itanium community when Slashdot confirmed that Linus thinks Intel dropped the ball with Itanium. Itanium now powers 0.00% or all servers. Coming on the heels of a Netcraft survey which plainly states that Itanium has gained absolutely NO market share. This reenforces what we've known all along: Itanium is collapsing in complete disarray.
You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict Itanium's future. The writing is on the wall: Itanium faces a bleak future, in fact there won't be any future at all because Itanium is dying. Intel has dumped millions into Itanium, red ink flows like a river of blood.
All major surveys show that Itanium has steadily held its ground at 0.00% use while millions of other processors are produced daily. If Itanium is to survive at all it will be among CPU dilettante dabblers and hangers-on. Nothing short of a miracle could save Itaniu, at this point in time. For all practical purposes, Itanium is dead.
Trolling is a art,
look here:
pricewatch
almost $3000 for the chip. wow, and for so many mhz, too...
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Actually that's a good question. I think chipmakers should slow down a bit and enjoy life. Perhaps meet halfway with a 48 bit chip...
Trolling is a art,
Code size matters. Price matters. Real world matters
If only on-chip instruction set morphing mattered...
(sorry, but it's true...he's living in a glass house on this one.)
"Did anybody notice a 2X performance boost moving from Windows 3.1 on 16bit MS-DOS to a nominally 32bit Windows 95 OS?"
I did. There was so much less time in between crashes that I learned to move quickly!
Well, that fud filled anti-MS joke should earn me a Karma point or two.
Good God, man, haven't you ever heard of polygon reduction? Bump mapping? Image mapping?
It's hard to believe you *really* need all of that RAM. Then again, I haven't done 3D in years.
When I was a CG guy, we dreamt of bus speeds above 66MHz. We couldn't even imagine having more than 32M RAM. And we thought it was reasonable to wait two days for a 2k image to render...
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
Ohboy, that's going to look really harsh when you read it after Slashdot removed my fake HTML tags reading "RANT" and "OLD MAN VOICE" around some of the content.
preview, preview, preview...
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
they were not needed for the first several years of DOS when people had only 512 kb of ram
Wha? I would have given my right arm for 512kb. Mine had 128k. Next step up had 256k. Geeze, 512k? We'd have been in happyland...
Yes, revolutionary.
Just like the Segway.
...The shipping is free.
If you overclocked it it would eat itself..
Can anyone tell me what he means by "baroque instruction encoding"?
well, you know what they say: if it ain't baroque, don't fix it.
i am going straight to hell for that one.
Founder, Americans Allied Against Alliteration
Some guy from Transmeta badmouths Intel's new processor and Slashdot files this under AMD?
I know that AMD has something to gain here but shouldn't this be under a different topic? Maybe when it gets reposted it'll be correct.
Gotta remember to put some oregano on my words for when I have to eat them.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
No, 32 bits was twice faster than 16 bits, and 64 bits is twice faster than 32 bits. (Quotation from "Practical Handbook of IT Managers")