Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Itanium IA-64 Support To Be Deprecated By GCC 10, Planned Removal In GCC 11

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HyperDrive
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    All right, that was a turkey, but it was not an inherently silly concept like the Itanium.
    I guess we could say iAPX 432 was too CISCy, while IA-64 was too RISCy. History shows that the sweet spot lies somewhere between the two philosophies.

    Leave a comment:


  • jacob
    replied
    Originally posted by HyperDrive View Post
    Lest we forget iAPX 432… 😏
    All right, that was a turkey, but it was not an inherently silly concept like the Itanium.

    Leave a comment:


  • HyperDrive
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    The Itanic will be remembered as one of the worst ideas in CPU design history, with a botched implementation to match.
    Lest we forget iAPX 432… 😏

    Leave a comment:


  • rmoog
    replied
    I've misread your message as follows:
    Originally posted by stormcrow View Post
    management-voters-slashdotters

    Leave a comment:


  • jacob
    replied
    The Itanic will be remembered as one of the worst ideas in CPU design history, with a botched implementation to match.

    Leave a comment:


  • Redfoxmoon
    replied
    Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

    In ten years you'll still have those containers running on whatever hardware they moved it to, probably with only difference is whatever they've replaced failed hardware in that intervening period. It's also just as likely those old Itanium servers will still be in use because no one in management wants to either spend money on migration, or none of the IT support staff want to wake the sleeping giant of problems trying to replace legacy hardware can cause. Like the IRS is still using decades old IBM mainframes, and companies still using old punch card calculator systems. If it's not broke, don't run the risk of "fixing it" and having a technical catastrophe (failed/inept migration) and/or political nightmare on your head (raising taxes to pay for it and/or major budget increases to management-voters-shareholders).

    https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing...rnment/128599/
    https://www.pcworld.com/article/2499...use-today.html

    If these aren't public facing systems, there's usually not any real risk to leaving them alone other than hardware failure.
    even then, the older the system, the less likely it is to fail, we've still got a HP 1000 chugging along here. :^)

    Leave a comment:


  • milkylainen
    replied
    Originally posted by Kemosabe View Post

    Right ...
    Now where is the smiley for the Ironic Captain Obivous...?

    Leave a comment:


  • stormcrow
    replied
    Originally posted by Drizzt321 View Post

    Build fresh replacements when an existing container runs just fine on whatever hardware? Are you kidding me? Pffff No, they'll just keep using the Intel compiler for years to come. Maybe in 10 years they'll embark on an effort to modernize, we'll see.
    In ten years you'll still have those containers running on whatever hardware they moved it to, probably with only difference is whatever they've replaced failed hardware in that intervening period. It's also just as likely those old Itanium servers will still be in use because no one in management wants to either spend money on migration, or none of the IT support staff want to wake the sleeping giant of problems trying to replace legacy hardware can cause. Like the IRS is still using decades old IBM mainframes, and companies still using old punch card calculator systems. If it's not broke, don't run the risk of "fixing it" and having a technical catastrophe (failed/inept migration) and/or political nightmare on your head (raising taxes to pay for it and/or major budget increases to management-voters-shareholders).

    https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing...rnment/128599/
    https://www.pcworld.com/article/2499...use-today.html

    If these aren't public facing systems, there's usually not any real risk to leaving them alone other than hardware failure.

    Leave a comment:


  • Drizzt321
    replied
    Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
    Most customers are moving legacy apps on HP-UX IA-64 to containers. Then they can let the clock run out on the hardware as HP allows. This gives them time to develop the replacements on the platform of their choice. Eazy-peasy.
    Build fresh replacements when an existing container runs just fine on whatever hardware? Are you kidding me? Pffff No, they'll just keep using the Intel compiler for years to come. Maybe in 10 years they'll embark on an effort to modernize, we'll see.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kemosabe
    replied
    Originally posted by milkylainen View Post
    Dead as a dodo. Intels best effort to sideline it's own x86 show, now defunct.
    But I'm sure x86 will die any day now...
    Right ...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X