One benefit to Oracle Applications is that it runs entirely as Java Applets over a web browser, requiring no more on the client than a browser bookmark.
It does use several keyboard accelerators which I've never figured out how to hit under Linux or Solaris JVMs, though.
If you will examine www.dell.com/Oracle8i, you will find the Dell "Oracle Database Appliance." It is running SUSE.
You might also examine www.suse.com/us/press/press_releases/archive01/fas t_center.html
where you will learn that Oracle/SUSE exceeds Oracle/NT - were you going to argue that NO ONE runs Oracle on NT?
Don't know about Linux/390 yet; it's too early to tell.
p.s. 1. We run Oracle on HP-UX - hope this doesn't disturb your generalization too much. 2. If soft updates are so great, show me a commercial player who has implemented them.
In the opposite of what any might have predicted, the BSD in Mac OS X is now a formidable desktop OS, despite BSD users constant assertions of its server prowess.
In spite of the wars (and heavy casualties) between genome and kde on Linux, increasing vendor support has pushed Linux far into the datacenter (Oracle 8i/9i, Linux on an IBM 390, the recent Compaq release of the Non-Stop Cluster code, etc.).
BSD has nowhere near the datacenter penetration, and Linux has nowhere near the desktop elegance.
This situation is perhaps diametrically opposed to what should be, but this is what the market, the developers, and the users have decided.
Don't like this state of affairs? Port ReiserFS and XFS to BSD. Get Mac OS X running on a Linux kernel.
p.s. And please don't tell me that softupdates makes journaling filesystems obsolete again - I'm bored of hearing it.
Remember that Microsoft is in a "Grow or Die" mode right now.
They have finally saturated the desktop market. They are trying to sustain growth in that sector, but doing so generates more and more bad PR as they crack down on the license terms.
In looking for areas in which to grow, the server market has become a primary target.
The problem for Microsoft is that you can only pull the wool over their eyes for so long - eventually, everyone is going to realize that what they are charging for can be had from other vendors for free (with higher quality as a bonus).
This fact will become even more aparent with UNIX releases tailored to run Win32 binaries (aka Lindows, etc.).
Regardless of how much marketing they throw at this issue, they can't change the fundamental truth behind it.
In a related vein, I heard a rumor that Microsoft is threatening the states that won't settle in the antitrust case with reduced licensing at high prices - supposedly some universities have been called and threatened with cutoffs or price increases.
I really hope that Microsoft tries this. I would wholeheartedly approve of the state and/or federal goverment throwing a few million dollars at developing alternate Win32 platforms.
If you are running a VLDB on Oracle, you want a 64-bit system; otherwise the SGA is limited to 2GIG.
Oracle only supports Linux x86, with all of its 32-bit memory constraints. Does Linux implement memory windows like 32-bit HP-UX?
Also, at linux.sybase.com, you can download for free the Alpha-axp version of Sybase ASE 11.0.3.3 - this is probably the most available commercial 64-bit database for Linux.
Really, the Linux and WinNT versions of Oracle are at the low end of the food chain.
Abandoning a user base is an extremely dangerous thing to do.
DEC orphaned a whole platform (MIPS DECStation) with a long stream of broken promises when Alpha was brought out. The seeds of Alpha's destruction were sown the moment of its birth. If DEC had been wise enough to develop an FX!32 for MIPS and an ability to run Ultrix binaries under OSF/1|Digital UNIX|Tru64, then the end of Alpha might have been a very different story indeed.
And now Intel/HP/DEC/Compaq has aspirations of repeating this sad history.
If AMD can deliver on even half of their promises, then Itanium is finished.
...and we should immediately conclude with the question are we lacking in any way from a server operating system perspective?
Linux as a server remains very strong; Samba can emulate a PDC, free Sybase is an MS-SQL Server 6.5 lookalike, complete replacements for an Exchange server are available, and Linux supports the whole family of UNIX server protocols. There is simply no excuse for Windows in the datacenter from a basic OS-functionality perspective.
True, there have been significant weaknesses. ext2 has been a problem for some time, but this is (close to) getting fixed (it would really help if the distributions would coordinate some of their work). I wish ipfwadm/ipchains/iptables would stop changing. We still suffer from significant fragmentation, which is most dangerous, for it is fragmentation that severely damaged commercial UNIX.
So is fragmentation the biggest danger in the server space? Are there even greater risks?
As far as the desktop market goes, no one in Linux is serious about desktop market share unless and until a major distribution releases a "Win32" edition with layered WINE optimized for running Windows binaries.
I took my copy of Titus Andronicus (Anthony Hopkins) to a friend's house this weekend, and we all remarked at how this story of the consequences of unthinking violence has tremendous bearing on recent world events.
I also remember hearing Joseph Campbell in one of his many lectures state that the artist has a responsibility to set the moral tone for the culture.
I have seen you in a number of your roles (the last being The Invisible Man if I am not mistaken), and while your parts have great entertainment value, they do not IMHO have much to say about fundamental aspects of the human condition.
Is this an avenue that you might want to explore in your career, even at the cost of financial liquidity?
While I'm no Windows expert...
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
I am certain that GUI functions are integrated into the kernel for speed.
While I may be wrong in asserting that HTML-handling functions are not in the kernel but in the shell, the GUI integration is then unquestioned and agreed by all.
Since the Windows kernels are closed source, the only people who are truly authoritative on this subject are under NDA, so I doubt that you can prove that no HTML influences are there.
It is a general goal in kernel design to keep as much as possible in user space for security purposes. Microsoft violates this goal to squeeze extra speed and functionality, with demonstrated effects.
I did not mean to come off as pompous, but merely to point out that good cs administration practices and what Microsoft advocates with their update agents are often diametrically opposed.
And I say again: for the best stability under Windows, never update IE because of its heavy integration with OS functions.
p.s. Stop envying my uid; it's unseemly.
Because upgrading IE often hoses your machine.
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I have known many people who have stability problems after upgrading IE.
AFAIK, IE is integrated into the kernel and replaces the file manager. Swapping out portions of the kernel, especially for something as whimsical as a browser upgrade, is just insanity.
One has to hope that a shipped WinME/2000 is (somewhat) stable when the codebase goes on the shelves of the retailers. The service packs and browser upgrades have much lower standards; users can't return the OS to the reseller years after purchase because a Microsoft patch made the system unstable.
Remember this Windows Update mantra: critical updates yes, browser updates never! If you want the latest browser features, use Mozilla.
The problem is that you need a basic background in computer science to understand what I just said.
linux.sybase.com - has all the fancy triggers and stored procedures, and the binary license is free (for the 11.0.3.3 release). Sybase is also very close in syntax and behavior to MS-SQL Server (they were the same codebase to release 4.8), so it's a good Linux evangelist tool for MS shops. They also have a 64-bit version for Alpha. On the downside, it's not very ANSI-SQL 92 compliant.
Postgres - getting more of the fancy features everyday, and support within RedHat is very strong - no need to recompile the webserver to use it. I have never understood why RedHat doesn't include DBD:Pg, though. Does Postgres have foreign keys yet?
These are all really great tools; why leave them out? I like Oracle too, but $10k per processor is pretty steep. Hey, it's big and slow, but at least it's expensive!
What does that mean? Like I said before, where are your facts? IA-64 has been in development for more than 5 years, completely separate from PA-RISC. What "PA-RISC components" are being exchanged for "Alpha designs?" I'm dying to know.
Well, this is the big one: http://www.theinquirer.net/14090103.htm (although this is pretty threatening to IA-64 too): http://www.theinquirer.net/13070103.htm
You seem pretty bullish about IA64. All the rest of the world can say to you is that the architecture is years late and fails to meet several design objectives (x86 performance at the very least, granted that FP is stunning). Perhaps if you had designed a better chip, you wouldn't be in this mess.
So you're saying that, because we started fabricating our chips in a better process, it means we're giving up on the architecture? Yeah, that seems pretty logical.
It is if HP cuts R&D efforts into further iterations - making this the last gasp of a dying line, falling into the grave a little sooner than any of us expected as the Tru64 acquisition accelerates the collapse. Oh, and you're also handing your designs to IBM, and I assume that the team that designed Power4 has now had a long opportunity to examine and be "influenced by" your work. AMD managed to implement copper in-house; Microsoft's decision to abandon OS/2 for Win95 in-house also shows a company mastering their own destiny; your choice is very telling: your destiny is controlled by others.
The porters of HP-UX to IA64 in NJ have been terminated... Don't know what that has to do with PA-RISC.
IA64 is the stated future of HP-UX. Why are we not to believe that Carly is terminating HP-UX with the termination of the NJ staff?
As I said, get out now. IA64 has too many problems to be a viable architecture, and the bloodbath that you are facing in competing with Hammer/Power4/Sparc will be the downfall of Intel/HP/Compaq/DEC.
I am a wealthy IT professional, and I assume that a lot of you here are too.
Assuming that we could get a lot of people similar to myself to contribute $100, could we buy the ability to shut down the RIIA's legal efforts for awhile?
Could we hit them with an avalanche of frivolous lawsuits?
How about restraint of trade?
Class action?
Could we involve law students to reduce costs?
It appears to me that we have two options: attack their lawyers or attack their revenue sources. If we don't do one of these things effectively, they will continue to oppress the public (and us specifically).
I'm tired of listening to the RIAA tell me how bad I am. Let's do something!
The latest version of SUSE now includes a new LVM. This LVM uses the same commands and arguments as HP. SUSE has a white paper on the new LVM implementation somewhere on their site.
SUSE also includes the ReiserFS journaling file system. By the way - Linux can store ACLs on most of it's JFS implementations - HP-UX cannot (you can only use ACLs on HFS, not VxFS). Care to explain this brain-damaged design?
Yes, Linux still has problems with enterprise scalability, but not the problems you've mentioned.
p.s. I'm pretty ticked off that RedHat seems to have done nothing with the LVM - not a peep.
The fact is, Carly could get a wild hair and decide that Itanium/NT is the way to go, and the HP-UX bloodbath would then commence. The customer base has absolutely no idea how this is going to work out, to say nothing regarding Tru64 or OpenVMS.
I had been led to believe that there were some rather intense political struggles between Ft. Collins and NJ, which your viewpoint seems to back up. These sort of internal struggles are of no real value to your customer base.
However, I have also been led to believe that the NJ team bore most of the responsibility for porting the HP-UX kernel to the Itanic. Losing this team is perhaps Carly's first salvo in slaughtering Ft. Collins. Remeber, Carly already has said that you could "drive a truck through HP's high end." What makes you think that you're so safe? I don't see this woman as a staunch defender of either HP-UX or Tru64.
As a customer, can you actually convince me that I should see this differently?
The people saying that HP is dropping everything to concentrate on Linux are nuts. Linux won't scale to 64 processors, it only recently lost the 2-gig filesize limit, HP has no hope of getting these scalability features past Linus, and there are other reasons why many still consider Linux a toy.
These layoffs a terrible move for HP in general. They need to develop two separate OS roadmaps, one assuming that the merger goes through, and one that assumes that it will be blocked.
Each roadmap needs to address all the important OSes (HPUX, Tru64, OpenVMS, MPE/ix, Linux) and the processors (Itanium, PA, Alpha).
Before they fire anybody, they need to share the roadmap with the public. This layoff makes HP appear to be backing away from the Itanium architecture and the HP-UX OS.
A tasteful merger of HP-UX and Tru64 can occur (and heck, TruHP might fix some of the big flaws in both), but it looks like taste is out the window as this hatchet-job proceeds.
You should be required to pack a gun to fly on a commercial airliner.
I'm tired of worrying about feeling helpless while some maniac mows down the passengers and points the plane at a skyscraper.
If everyone packs a gun, and the airlines fly at an altitude where depressurization is not catastrophic, this problem is solved.
Give me a break. The woman's an idiot.
on
HP Buys Compaq
·
· Score: 2
Do you see HP making great strides in the IT world? Do you see them giving away their OS for free (like SUN), or contributing large portions of it to open-source-free-software projects (like IBM and SGI)?
No, the best thing that HP could come up with was hiring Bruce Perens. Close, but no cigar.
To me, it seems like HP is acquiring Compaq to ensure that it maintains a reasonable amount of control over the Itanium architecture, as Alpha technology began rolling in. After all, they've "bet the company" on Itanium, and Intel/Compaq began to assure customers that Alpha and Itanium are one and the same (implying not just SMT integration but support for the Alpha ISA?).
If Carly wants to impress me with her business acumen, she must:
Announce that OS clustering technologies for all OSes will be merged and headed by a group of VMS engineers (clustering is a VMS strongpoint).
Ditch Veritas in HPUX for the Tru64 filesystem that can multimount the same filesystem from several machines.
Announce binary compatibility of Tru64 and HPUX on Itanium (does Itanium already have the equivalent of iBCS?).
Come forth with a plan to merge Tru64 and HPUX into a single OS.
Announce an agressive plan to rekindle Alpha, including low-cost Alpha systems to compete with Sledgehammer.
Maintain a port of the combined HPUX/Tru64 on x86, and give away a copy that supports one processor for free.
HP and Compaq have no idea how to survive in this marketplace. It will take a great deal more than a smoke-and-mirrors merger to prove otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
One benefit to Oracle Applications is that it runs entirely as Java Applets over a web browser, requiring no more on the client than a browser bookmark.
It does use several keyboard accelerators which I've never figured out how to hit under Linux or Solaris JVMs, though.
At least everyone in my area is configured to proxy off of http://www.
This is of course the very first place to look to see who is visiting what.
Yes, carnivore and its like can probably deal with this subterfuge quite easily...
If you will examine www.dell.com/Oracle8i, you will find the Dell "Oracle Database Appliance." It is running SUSE.
You might also examine www.suse.com/us/press/press_releases/archive01/fas t_center.html
where you will learn that Oracle/SUSE exceeds Oracle/NT - were you going to argue that NO ONE runs Oracle on NT?
Don't know about Linux/390 yet; it's too early to tell.
In the opposite of what any might have predicted, the BSD in Mac OS X is now a formidable desktop OS, despite BSD users constant assertions of its server prowess.
In spite of the wars (and heavy casualties) between genome and kde on Linux, increasing vendor support has pushed Linux far into the datacenter (Oracle 8i/9i, Linux on an IBM 390, the recent Compaq release of the Non-Stop Cluster code, etc.).
BSD has nowhere near the datacenter penetration, and Linux has nowhere near the desktop elegance.
This situation is perhaps diametrically opposed to what should be, but this is what the market, the developers, and the users have decided.
Don't like this state of affairs? Port ReiserFS and XFS to BSD. Get Mac OS X running on a Linux kernel.
Remember that Microsoft is in a "Grow or Die" mode right now.
They have finally saturated the desktop market. They are trying to sustain growth in that sector, but doing so generates more and more bad PR as they crack down on the license terms.
In looking for areas in which to grow, the server market has become a primary target.
The problem for Microsoft is that you can only pull the wool over their eyes for so long - eventually, everyone is going to realize that what they are charging for can be had from other vendors for free (with higher quality as a bonus).
This fact will become even more aparent with UNIX releases tailored to run Win32 binaries (aka Lindows, etc.).
Regardless of how much marketing they throw at this issue, they can't change the fundamental truth behind it.
In a related vein, I heard a rumor that Microsoft is threatening the states that won't settle in the antitrust case with reduced licensing at high prices - supposedly some universities have been called and threatened with cutoffs or price increases.
I really hope that Microsoft tries this. I would wholeheartedly approve of the state and/or federal goverment throwing a few million dollars at developing alternate Win32 platforms.
If you are running a VLDB on Oracle, you want a 64-bit system; otherwise the SGA is limited to 2GIG.
Oracle only supports Linux x86, with all of its 32-bit memory constraints. Does Linux implement memory windows like 32-bit HP-UX?
Also, at linux.sybase.com, you can download for free the Alpha-axp version of Sybase ASE 11.0.3.3 - this is probably the most available commercial 64-bit database for Linux.
Really, the Linux and WinNT versions of Oracle are at the low end of the food chain.
Are you willing to spend over $3000 for P100 speeds for your x86 code?
Neither is anybody else. The emperor has no clothes.
Abandoning a user base is an extremely dangerous thing to do.
DEC orphaned a whole platform (MIPS DECStation) with a long stream of broken promises when Alpha was brought out. The seeds of Alpha's destruction were sown the moment of its birth. If DEC had been wise enough to develop an FX!32 for MIPS and an ability to run Ultrix binaries under OSF/1|Digital UNIX|Tru64, then the end of Alpha might have been a very different story indeed.
And now Intel/HP/DEC/Compaq has aspirations of repeating this sad history.
If AMD can deliver on even half of their promises, then Itanium is finished.
...and we should immediately conclude with the question are we lacking in any way from a server operating system perspective?
Linux as a server remains very strong; Samba can emulate a PDC, free Sybase is an MS-SQL Server 6.5 lookalike, complete replacements for an Exchange server are available, and Linux supports the whole family of UNIX server protocols. There is simply no excuse for Windows in the datacenter from a basic OS-functionality perspective.
True, there have been significant weaknesses. ext2 has been a problem for some time, but this is (close to) getting fixed (it would really help if the distributions would coordinate some of their work). I wish ipfwadm/ipchains/iptables would stop changing. We still suffer from significant fragmentation, which is most dangerous, for it is fragmentation that severely damaged commercial UNIX.
So is fragmentation the biggest danger in the server space? Are there even greater risks?
As far as the desktop market goes, no one in Linux is serious about desktop market share unless and until a major distribution releases a "Win32" edition with layered WINE optimized for running Windows binaries.
I do wish that we could get serious.
...and you need to keep what work the other person can do in mind as you select them.
Intelligence and sophistication are not as important as motivation in a romantic relationship; always choose substance over form.
Select someone with abilities vastly below your own only when you know what you are doing...
...at which point, you will discover that you don't.
I took my copy of Titus Andronicus (Anthony Hopkins) to a friend's house this weekend, and we all remarked at how this story of the consequences of unthinking violence has tremendous bearing on recent world events.
I also remember hearing Joseph Campbell in one of his many lectures state that the artist has a responsibility to set the moral tone for the culture.
I have seen you in a number of your roles (the last being The Invisible Man if I am not mistaken), and while your parts have great entertainment value, they do not IMHO have much to say about fundamental aspects of the human condition.
Is this an avenue that you might want to explore in your career, even at the cost of financial liquidity?
I am certain that GUI functions are integrated into the kernel for speed.
While I may be wrong in asserting that HTML-handling functions are not in the kernel but in the shell, the GUI integration is then unquestioned and agreed by all.
Since the Windows kernels are closed source, the only people who are truly authoritative on this subject are under NDA, so I doubt that you can prove that no HTML influences are there.
It is a general goal in kernel design to keep as much as possible in user space for security purposes. Microsoft violates this goal to squeeze extra speed and functionality, with demonstrated effects.
I did not mean to come off as pompous, but merely to point out that good cs administration practices and what Microsoft advocates with their update agents are often diametrically opposed.
And I say again: for the best stability under Windows, never update IE because of its heavy integration with OS functions.
p.s. Stop envying my uid; it's unseemly.
I have known many people who have stability problems after upgrading IE.
AFAIK, IE is integrated into the kernel and replaces the file manager. Swapping out portions of the kernel, especially for something as whimsical as a browser upgrade, is just insanity.
One has to hope that a shipped WinME/2000 is (somewhat) stable when the codebase goes on the shelves of the retailers. The service packs and browser upgrades have much lower standards; users can't return the OS to the reseller years after purchase because a Microsoft patch made the system unstable.
Remember this Windows Update mantra: critical updates yes, browser updates never! If you want the latest browser features, use Mozilla.
The problem is that you need a basic background in computer science to understand what I just said.
It handles CDDA, DVD, VCD, and MP3 discs.
No, it doesn't run TCP/IP, but it seems like much less hassle to me.
Nobody, but NOBODY, will challenge Oracle with a database unless SAP and PeopleSoft port to it.
I wish RedHat had understood this. RedHat might have been better off bundling SAP-DB and selling an SAP-optimized version.
Try throwing 20 million rows in and out of the server everyday. Big RDBMSes still have a place. Write portable SQL as much as you can.
Might I suggest some additions:
These are all really great tools; why leave them out? I like Oracle too, but $10k per processor is pretty steep. Hey, it's big and slow, but at least it's expensive!
Well, this is the big one: http://www.theinquirer.net/14090103.htm (although this is pretty threatening to IA-64 too): http://www.theinquirer.net/13070103.htm
You seem pretty bullish about IA64. All the rest of the world can say to you is that the architecture is years late and fails to meet several design objectives (x86 performance at the very least, granted that FP is stunning). Perhaps if you had designed a better chip, you wouldn't be in this mess.
It is if HP cuts R&D efforts into further iterations - making this the last gasp of a dying line, falling into the grave a little sooner than any of us expected as the Tru64 acquisition accelerates the collapse. Oh, and you're also handing your designs to IBM, and I assume that the team that designed Power4 has now had a long opportunity to examine and be "influenced by" your work. AMD managed to implement copper in-house; Microsoft's decision to abandon OS/2 for Win95 in-house also shows a company mastering their own destiny; your choice is very telling: your destiny is controlled by others.
IA64 is the stated future of HP-UX. Why are we not to believe that Carly is terminating HP-UX with the termination of the NJ staff?
As I said, get out now. IA64 has too many problems to be a viable architecture, and the bloodbath that you are facing in competing with Hammer/Power4/Sparc will be the downfall of Intel/HP/Compaq/DEC.
It will all end in tears.
Let's just review some facts:
For God's sakes, man, how much more evidence do you need that HP-UX/PA-RISC (and perhaps IA64) is doomed? Get out now before it's too late!
I am a wealthy IT professional, and I assume that a lot of you here are too.
Assuming that we could get a lot of people similar to myself to contribute $100, could we buy the ability to shut down the RIIA's legal efforts for awhile?
It appears to me that we have two options: attack their lawyers or attack their revenue sources. If we don't do one of these things effectively, they will continue to oppress the public (and us specifically).
I'm tired of listening to the RIAA tell me how bad I am. Let's do something!
The latest version of SUSE now includes a new LVM. This LVM uses the same commands and arguments as HP. SUSE has a white paper on the new LVM implementation somewhere on their site.
SUSE also includes the ReiserFS journaling file system. By the way - Linux can store ACLs on most of it's JFS implementations - HP-UX cannot (you can only use ACLs on HFS, not VxFS). Care to explain this brain-damaged design?
Yes, Linux still has problems with enterprise scalability, but not the problems you've mentioned.
p.s. I'm pretty ticked off that RedHat seems to have done nothing with the LVM - not a peep.
The fact is, Carly could get a wild hair and decide that Itanium/NT is the way to go, and the HP-UX bloodbath would then commence. The customer base has absolutely no idea how this is going to work out, to say nothing regarding Tru64 or OpenVMS.
I had been led to believe that there were some rather intense political struggles between Ft. Collins and NJ, which your viewpoint seems to back up. These sort of internal struggles are of no real value to your customer base.
However, I have also been led to believe that the NJ team bore most of the responsibility for porting the HP-UX kernel to the Itanic. Losing this team is perhaps Carly's first salvo in slaughtering Ft. Collins. Remeber, Carly already has said that you could "drive a truck through HP's high end." What makes you think that you're so safe? I don't see this woman as a staunch defender of either HP-UX or Tru64.
As a customer, can you actually convince me that I should see this differently?
The people saying that HP is dropping everything to concentrate on Linux are nuts. Linux won't scale to 64 processors, it only recently lost the 2-gig filesize limit, HP has no hope of getting these scalability features past Linus, and there are other reasons why many still consider Linux a toy.
These layoffs a terrible move for HP in general. They need to develop two separate OS roadmaps, one assuming that the merger goes through, and one that assumes that it will be blocked.
Each roadmap needs to address all the important OSes (HPUX, Tru64, OpenVMS, MPE/ix, Linux) and the processors (Itanium, PA, Alpha).
Before they fire anybody, they need to share the roadmap with the public. This layoff makes HP appear to be backing away from the Itanium architecture and the HP-UX OS.
A tasteful merger of HP-UX and Tru64 can occur (and heck, TruHP might fix some of the big flaws in both), but it looks like taste is out the window as this hatchet-job proceeds.
You should be required to pack a gun to fly on a commercial airliner.
I'm tired of worrying about feeling helpless while some maniac mows down the passengers and points the plane at a skyscraper.
If everyone packs a gun, and the airlines fly at an altitude where depressurization is not catastrophic, this problem is solved.
Do you see HP making great strides in the IT world? Do you see them giving away their OS for free (like SUN), or contributing large portions of it to open-source-free-software projects (like IBM and SGI)?
No, the best thing that HP could come up with was hiring Bruce Perens. Close, but no cigar.
To me, it seems like HP is acquiring Compaq to ensure that it maintains a reasonable amount of control over the Itanium architecture, as Alpha technology began rolling in. After all, they've "bet the company" on Itanium, and Intel/Compaq began to assure customers that Alpha and Itanium are one and the same (implying not just SMT integration but support for the Alpha ISA?).
If Carly wants to impress me with her business acumen, she must:
HP and Compaq have no idea how to survive in this marketplace. It will take a great deal more than a smoke-and-mirrors merger to prove otherwise.