Microsoft cancels Windows XP for Itanium

[dotTom]

Microsoft has cancelled Windows XP for Intel's Itanium processor.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/05/ms_cancels_itanicxp/

This is another nail in the coffin for Intel's failed Itanium processor. For those not familiar, Intel originally designed the 64-bit Itanium processor as a replacement for the 32-bit Pentium processor.

However, the Itanium turned out to be one of the biggest corporate failures since Motorola's doomed Irridium satellite phone network failed to catch on, costing billions of dollars.

The Windows world is instead jumping to AMD's x86-64 format processors, such as the Opteron. Intel has lost its control of the processor world, and is now forced to license x86-64 technology from AMD.Actually Microsoft isn't "forced to licence x86-64", Microsoft worked hand in hand with AMD to draw up the x64-64 microarchitecture (BTW, "x64" is how Microsoft refers to both AMD x64-64 and Intel's EM64T extension to their IA32 architecture). Microsoft wanted a 64 bit architecture that did not force a recompile (which the EPIC Intel IA64 architecture does), Microsoft has no real love for Intel. Here's da beef: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_8366_7823_8718%5E7839,00.html. Dave Cutler was the chap Microsoft brought over from DEC to create Windows NT.

[percydaman]

This just goes to show that eventually everyone is in danger. Nobody, even Intel is perfect and can hold onto a marketshare stranglehold forever. All I can say is that thank god amd got their crap together way back when and has forced intel to rethink some things. I shudder to imagine how things might be right now if there truly was only Intel.

[mummey]

Actually Microsoft isn't "forced to licence x86-64", Microsoft worked hand in hand with AMD to draw up the x64-64 microarchitecture (BTW, "x64" is how Microsoft refers to both AMD x64-64 and Intel's EM64T extension to their IA32 architecture). Microsoft wanted a 64 bit architecture that did not force a recompile (which the EPIC Intel IA64 architecture does), Microsoft has no real love for Intel. Here's da beef: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Weblets/0,,7832_8366_7823_8718%5E7839,00.html. Dave Cutler was the chap Microsoft brought over from DEC to create Windows NT.
For those who aren't ol skool:

Add one to each character: VMS => WNT

Look up VMS if you want to understand where NT got its lineage from.

[Thalaxis]

This just goes to show that eventually everyone is in danger. Nobody, even Intel is perfect and can hold onto a marketshare stranglehold forever. All I can say is that thank god amd got their crap together way back when and has forced intel to rethink some things. I shudder to imagine how things might be right now if there truly was only Intel.
No, what this shows is that some people are truly incapable of learning.

So far, AMD hasn't actually made a dent in Intel's earnings; they're still setting records and growing.
The only thing that AMD did was alter their x86 strategy.

Itanium was intended from the outside to be primarily a high-end product, and it's gaining a lot of
ground in both supercomputing and enterprise niches. It's not likely to be a volume product anytime
soon, but according to the market, it's neither dying nor failed. Even IBM's on the bandwagon, though
they don't trumpet that part too loudly.

[mummey]

No, what this shows is that some people are truly incapable of learning.

So far, AMD hasn't actually made a dent in Intel's earnings; they're still setting records and growing.
The only thing that AMD did was alter their x86 strategy.

Itanium was intended from the outside to be primarily a high-end product, and it's gaining a lot of
ground in both supercomputing and enterprise niches. It's not likely to be a volume product anytime
soon, but according to the market, it's neither dying nor failed. Even IBM's on the bandwagon, though
they don't trumpet that part too loudly.
The phrase "Don't p*** on me and tell me its rain." comes to mind.

Intel DID hype up Itanium to be the 2nd coming of the PC. Only when migration and cost issues could not be resolved did they try to save face and say "This is not intended for the mainstream market."

As to whether IBM uses it. Itanium was a collaboration between Intel and HP. IBM having an Itanium model around it probably because some companies already had HP Itanium servers running custom software and are looking to upgrade.

Itanium is fast, but it is also costly because of its issues. MS dropping support it reminescent of when MS dropped support of the Alpha processor for Windows 2000.

[percydaman]

No, what this shows is that some people are truly incapable of learning.

So far, AMD hasn't actually made a dent in Intel's earnings; they're still setting records and growing.
The only thing that AMD did was alter their x86 strategy.

Itanium was intended from the outside to be primarily a high-end product, and it's gaining a lot of
ground in both supercomputing and enterprise niches. It's not likely to be a volume product anytime
soon, but according to the market, it's neither dying nor failed. Even IBM's on the bandwagon, though
they don't trumpet that part too loudly.Your thinking too specifically. My perspective was on a very general basis. Intel really hyped the itanium, and now its not going so well, while amd's 64bit processor has gone much more smoothly for them. My point is just that before amd became competitive, Intel really had a stranglehold on the market. Of course they still do, but Intel now has to think about what their doing and what their competitors are doing as well. Same with nvidia. Competition is healthy for the marketplace, which is all my post was really trying to convey.

[Thalaxis]

Intel DID hype up Itanium to be the 2nd coming of the PC. Only when migration and cost issues could not be resolved did they try to save face and say "This is not intended for the mainstream market."

Actually, Intel didn't hype Itanium much at all. The vast majority of the hype surrounding it came from
the press.

Intel should have been much smarter about dealing with it, though. That's pretty clear.


As to whether IBM uses it. Itanium was a collaboration between Intel and HP. IBM having an Itanium model around it probably because some companies already had HP Itanium servers running custom software and are looking to upgrade.

What are you talking about? IBM developed a custom chipset for their Itanium system. They also
developed a custom chipset to allow for a 64-processor Xeon. Both were in response to customer
demand, according to IBM.


Itanium is fast, but it is also costly because of its issues. MS dropping support it reminescent of when MS dropped support of the Alpha processor for Windows 2000.
It's only costly because of it's market. And MS didn't drop support for it. That's another result of
selective illiteracy. There's a difference between dropping XP for Itanium and dropping support
for Itanium.

[Thalaxis]

Your thinking too specifically. My perspective was on a very general basis.

Your perspective is not based on reality, so generality has nothing to do with it.

[percydaman]

Your perspective is not based on reality, so generality has nothing to do with it.
If you say so..... :rolleyes:

[Thalaxis]

If you say so..... :rolleyes:
If you don't want to open your eyes, don't blame me for your ignorance.

[mustique]

The curse of Alpha! Huahahha!!

[Vertizor]

Holy crap! Talk about jumping to conclusions and mis-leading headlines. Did you guys even read the article?

It [Miscrosoft] will also continue to make a high-end version of its Server OS for Itanium chips.

Microsoft believes Windows for Itanium-based systems is a stronger offering in the high-end server market, and will continue to promote and offer Windows Server 2003 Enterprise and Datacenter Editions for Itanium-based systems," said a Microsoft spokesperson.

They're just saying Windows XP Pro is canned. It's a focus shift, not a bail out.

[Beamtracer]

They're just saying Windows XP Pro is canned. It's a focus shift, not a bail out. I'd call it death by a thousand cuts for Itanium.

The dream of bringing Itanium to the desktop has died. Back in the late 1990s Intel marketing was promoting Itanium as an eventual desktop replacement. Now even the server strategy is doubtful with Microsoft withdrawing clustering support. I guess there's still Linux.

Even Newtek ported Lightwave 3D to Itanium a few years ago, but there was no market for Itanium. The product was never released to the public.

AMD's x86-64 and Intel's EM64T are basically the same thing. Intel has been forced to adopt and copy AMD's architecture. This is a pie in the face for Intel.

Intel has been and still is a monopolist. A stronger AMD is a good thing for Windows users. A bit more even competition will mean better processors from both companies. A monopoly is not good for end users.

[Thalaxis]

I'd call it death by a thousand cuts for Itanium.

That's because you're one of those people who refuses to open your eyes.


The dream of bringing Itanium to the desktop has died. Back in the late 1990s Intel marketing was promoting Itanium as an eventual desktop replacement. Now even the server strategy is doubtful with Microsoft withdrawing clustering support. I guess there's still Linux.

Intel marketing didn't do that, and there's a lot of industry adoption of Linux on Itanium. You ought to
have a look at the sales figures for HP, SGI, and Bull (among others). The data show exactly the
opposite of what you claim.


AMD's x86-64 and Intel's EM64T are basically the same thing. Intel has been forced to adopt and copy AMD's architecture. This is a pie in the face for Intel.

You actually said something that makes sense! It's a miracle!


Intel has been and still is a monopolist. A stronger AMD is a good thing for Windows users. A bit more even competition will mean better processors from both companies. A monopoly is not good for end users.
Intel is a company out to make a profit. I agree that having AMD around as a competitor is a good
thing, but having a competitor for IBM in the high end is also a good thing, but then you never were
very good at consistency, or you'd have realized that. Itanium and Opteron aren't competitors, and
won't be for probably a couple of years more.

[kex]

thiers like 10 people here just waiting for some unexpecting sole to state that either amd or intels better. http://cgtalk.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

guys please get of the amd or intel has market share etc plot itl end in tears

[percydaman]

I agree that having AMD around as a competitor is a good
thing, but having a competitor for IBM in the high end is also a good thing Thank you for validating the entire point of my original post. And yes Intel DID hype the Itanium. As someone who until just recently worked for a company who directly sold wet etch benches to intel, I can say that they DID hype it. For the sake of argument, say they didn't hype it. Doesn't mean that it wasn't hyped period. Which to the vast majority of the public, wont see the difference. We're mired in different perspectives and semantics. Agree to disagree and move on.

[Thalaxis]

Thank you for validating the entire point of my original post. And yes Intel DID hype the Itanium. As someone who until just recently worked for a company who directly sold wet etch benches to intel, I can say that they DID hype it. For the sake of argument, say they didn't hype it.

Then you should also be aware of the fact that they've been marketing it as primarily a high-end
solution from day one, regardless of whether or not they wanted to eventually also replace x86
with it. The dolts with the "Itanium failed" tripe are basing most of their assinine arguments on the
premise that it isn't making it outside of the high-end market.


Doesn't mean that it wasn't hyped period. Which to the vast majority of the public, wont see the difference. We're mired in different perspectives and semantics. Agree to disagree and move on.
True, because most of the public chooses to believe the press, and also tends to believe whoever
says what they want to hear.

[Funk Ride]

Didn't HP recently drop Itanium from their server line-up?

[percydaman]

Just to clarify, I never stated that I thought the Itaniums were intended for mass use. Their price alone would make that very difficult.

[ThirdEye]

Calm down you all please, it's just a cpu.

[Beamtracer]

I can't remember another processor that has failed so dismally in the marketplace, from day one onward. I mean, the Itanium was 12 or more years in the making. It must have cost billions in development.

If we talk about IBM as a competitor in the server market, remember that IBM's Power line of processors has derivatives that are also sold to the consumer market. Apple is one of its customers. There's even speculation that Apple may take an unmodified IBM Power5 processor for future Macs, but that remains to be seen.

Intel's base for Itanium seems to be dwindling all the time. There's no longer a mass market. I haven't heard about any plans to create a derivative for embedded uses. Once people thought they'd be using Itaniums as their 3D workstations, but no more.

There's also another company that stands to lose more from the Itanium fiasco than Intel. That's Hewlett Packard. I can't imagine that HP is too pleased with Intel right now.

[js33]

HP was the company that started the Itanium and then gradually put more of the design on Intel. They wanted a processor to replace their PA-RISC processor. Microsoft doesn't see the need for the Itanium on the desktop since we already have the AMD Opteron and AMD64 so they told Intel they weren't making a second desktop OS so Intel had to adopt by using the AMD 64 bit extensions for the desktop and leave the Itanium for the server market which is exactly what they are doing. MS is making the Server version of Windows for the Itanium which it has been doing all along. But I do agree that Intel seemed a bit shortsighted thinking the desktop world could just move to 64 bit without 32 bit compatiablity. AMD had it right in that regard but keep in mind that they are still just a small blip on Intels radar even with their current success.

Cheers,
JS

[opus13]

Didn't HP recently drop Itanium from their server line-up? no, they said it wasnt worth their time to develop platforms for it. after all is said and done they realized that the time, energy, & funds that were getting marked for development efforts were being wasted.

they are selling off their itanium stuffs to intel, but they will be a reseller of itanium hardware. they have made promises for future support of the itanium, and have to live up to those now.

[Funk Ride]

they are selling off their itanium stuffs to intel, but they will be a reseller of itanium hardware. they have made promises for future support of the itanium, and have to live up to those now.


Cheers, I knew I remembered something about HP abandoning Itanium, or something like that.

[Thalaxis]

I can't remember another processor that has failed so dismally in the marketplace, from day one onward. I mean, the Itanium was 12 or more years in the making. It must have cost billions in development.

That's only because you're so totallly clueless AND blind. It's doing pretty well in enterprise already,
and kicking ass and taking names in supercomputing.


If we talk about IBM as a competitor in the server market, remember that IBM's Power line of processors has derivatives that are also sold to the consumer market. Apple is one of its customers. There's even speculation that Apple may take an unmodified IBM Power5 processor for future Macs, but that remains to be seen.

You ought to have a look at the cost for the packaging and system infrastructure alone for Power5.


Intel's base for Itanium seems to be dwindling all the time. There's no longer a mass market. I haven't heard about any plans to create a derivative for embedded uses. Once people thought they'd be using Itaniums as their 3D workstations, but no more.

There never was a mass market for Itanium. And if you think its sales are dwindling, you really ARE
blind.


There's also another company that stands to lose more from the Itanium fiasco than Intel. That's Hewlett Packard. I can't imagine that HP is too pleased with Intel right now.
Since the sales of their Itanium based products have been growing as well as the resulting revenues,
and the fact that they're converting their NonStop and VMS products to Itanium, that's highly unlikely.

[Thalaxis]

Cheers, I knew I remembered something about HP abandoning Itanium, or something like that.
You either remember incorrectly or suffer from a severe case of selective illiteracy, because that's
entirely incorrect.

[Thalaxis]

no, they said it wasnt worth their time to develop platforms for it. after all is said and done they realized that the time, energy, & funds that were getting marked for development efforts were being wasted.

That's actually precisely the opposite of what HP stated.

What they said is that they're giving the processors development over to Intel, which has been their
plan for quite a while, because they don't want to deal with the cost of semiconductor fabrication.

At the same time, they also stated that they were planning a budget of $3 billion toward future Itanium
system development.

[Funk Ride]

You either remember incorrectly or suffer from a severe case of selective illiteracy, because that's
entirely incorrect.


Uh huh, cheers, but I think I remembered correctly on this one.

Nice attitude though.

[Funk Ride]

That's actually precisely the opposite of what HP stated.

What they said is that they're giving the processors development over to Intel, which has been their
plan for quite a while, because they don't want to deal with the cost of semiconductor fabrication.

At the same time, they also stated that they were planning a budget of $3 billion toward future Itanium
system development.


What for? Certainly not HP workstations, they abandoned Itanium ones.

[Funk Ride]

A little clarification:

"HP, is doing a lot of explaining after it revealed this weekend that it will no longer put Itanium processors in its high-performance workstations.

The company said its decision was based on a lack of 64 bit software applications from Microsoft and the trend toward 64-bit extension Xeon chips coming from Intel, and AMD's Opteron.

A spokesperson for Microsoft was not immediately available for comment.

HP said it will discontinue its Zx2000 and Zx6000 towers. HP said it would continue to take orders until the end of October and would offer support for these systems for the next five years.

HP also reiterated that it would still continue to support the 64-bit EPIC-based processors, which it co-developed with Intel, for its Integrity high-performance server family."

http://64bit.us/article-print-54.html


So, like I originally said, I remembered HP were abandoning Itanium. I just didn't know in which area, hence me asking the question.

[Thalaxis]

Uh huh, cheers, but I think I remembered correctly on this one.

Nope, you were wrong. They're keeping the Itanium servers alive, and investing quite a bit of R&D in
them.

[Thalaxis]

So, like I originally said, I remembered HP were abandoning Itanium. I just didn't know in which area, hence me asking the question.
You said they were abandoning Itanium... that's very much not true. It was obviously selective illiteracy
on your part, because while cancelling their Itanium workstations, they reiterated their committment to
Itanium servers, which are worth a LOT more money to them.

[Thalaxis]

What for? Certainly not HP workstations, they abandoned Itanium ones.
The vast majority of their sales (99% by revenue) of Itanium-based products weren't from workstations.

[Funk Ride]

Nope, you were wrong. They're keeping the Itanium servers alive, and investing quite a bit of R&D in
them.


I am wrong in asking a question? Which is what I did. I was right in reply to your post in which you made no mention of them dropping Itanium, which they have done in their workstation line.

So it stands, that HP have dropped Itanium, albeit in their workstation lines.

Cheers.

[Funk Ride]

You said they were abandoning Itanium... that's very much not true. It was obviously selective illiteracy
on your part, because while cancelling their Itanium workstations, they reiterated their committment to
Itanium servers, which are worth a LOT more money to them.


How the hell is it selective literacy to say this "Didn't HP recently drop Itanium from their server line-up?" Which is what I wrote.

I think you have a problem with English here, and general understanding. I asked a question, meaning, I couldn't have possibly known what the real answer was, hence me asking. Your reply utterly failed to comment on them dropping Itanium in certain parts of their line-up, hence me remembering something about them dropping it.

Next time, watch wo you abuse, and drop the attitiude. Maybe I'll give you the time of day in future.

[Funk Ride]

The vast majority of their sales (99% by revenue) of Itanium-based products weren't from workstations.

I don't care what percentage of sales they made up, not interested. I asked if they had dropped Itanium (based on hearing it a while back), and they had done for workstations. Point being, I don't give toss what their sales are, just if they had dropped Itanium, I repeat once more, "which they had done in workstations."

Comprehend?

[Thalaxis]

I don't care what percentage of sales they made up, not interested.
I asked if they had dropped Itanium (based on hearing it a while back), and they had done for workstations. Point being, I don't give toss what their sales are, just if they had dropped Itanium, I repeat once more, "which they had done in workstations."
Comprehend?

Cheers, I knew I remembered something about HP abandoning Itanium, or something like that.

That's what I was responding to... which as written is quite inaccurate. My irritation however stems from
another source, which was initially the focus of this thread. I caught your post out of context and should
have replied to a certain other person instead, not you. Sorry. :sad:

[mummey]

I don't care what percentage of sales they made up, not interested. I asked if they had dropped Itanium (based on hearing it a while back), and they had done for workstations. Point being, I don't give toss what their sales are, just if they had dropped Itanium, I repeat once more, "which they had done in workstations."

Comprehend?
In case you haven't figured out yet. Thalaxis is an Itanium troll. No point in arguing with him.

[Thalaxis]

In case you haven't figured out yet. Thalaxis is an Itanium troll. No point in arguing with him.
Only in the minds of the defective.

What I am is impatient and highly intolerant of misinformation.

[richcz3]

For all the years that people have typed M$ or bemoaned the behemoth markets intel dominates, its clear that business nature is taking its course. Itanium is just one of many problems Intel had to face up to in 2004. Craig Barret admitted they allowed their quality in engineering to fall by the wayside on chipset and processor R&D. Sure the slide is fractional and almost indisceranble but it happens. Huge companies despite their capital worth take a long time to make corrections.
It takes real genuine efforts by under dogs like AMD to dent an industry giant like Intel, let alone hope to ever stand toe to toe with it.

Like it or not MS and Intel get lax and do rest on the laurels. I am a believer in MS but I can clearly see products like Firefox is superior in ease of use and functionality to IE without compromise. AMD my choice of CPU for 5 years has consitantly raised the bar since it beat Intel to the 1Ghz mark. So long as little companies put up serious contention and less excuses, bigger behemoths will have to quicken their lathargic gaits. AMD may never overtake Intel but its definately setting a course that Intel must follow.

[Thalaxis]

AMD may never overtake Intel but its definately setting a course that Intel must follow.
If they reach their goal of 200 million units per year, they could be quite a large thorn in Intel's side.

They were never planning to try to hit that point quickly, but they're obviously doing something right if
they can charge as much for Opteron as Intel can for a XeonMP.

[slaughters]

OK Thalaxis,

You called people stupid, defective, "not based in reality", ignorant, "never being good at consistancy", and generally just plain lashed out at every single person posting an opinion you disagree with.

Calm down and try to obey the posting rules, which frown on the kind of personal attacks you've been using.

[percydaman]

OK Thalaxis,

You called people stupid, defective, "not based in reality", ignorant, "never being good at consistancy", and generally just plain lashed out at every single person posting an opinion you disagree with.

Calm down and try to obey the posting rules, which frown on the kind of personal attacks you've been using.
Don't forget illiterate. That was a good one. I dont think thalaxis is capable of making a point without attempting to belittle people. Character flaw I suppose.

[kex]

if you cant post nicely dont post at all ;P

[Apoclypse]

Who cares, Windows sucks anyways. ( Here come the flames baby).

[salmonmoose]

Go and make some 3D, it really doesn't matter.

[Vertizor]

My gosh, if people saw my first post, maybe we could have avoided a lot of this heated debate. Not trying to put myself up on a pedistal or anything. But seriously, go back to page 1, click the link, and actually READ it!

1. Miscrosoft is choosing not to support multiple versions of Windows XP for multiple 64-bit specs. That means x86-64 is IT for desktops and workstations.

2. Windows 2003 Server, shares the same core as this "XP" marketecture, will continue to be available for Itanium. MS is losing sales here. If they really want to convince people that Windows Server editions are better than Linux (I'm sorry I have to laugh out loud on that phrase) they have to have a high-end offering.

3. Historically, Unix owns the market of high-end "big iron" super computers. Linux is making it's way into that territory. If you (the people in this thread) are so eager to bury Itanium, you're going to have to do more than just rip an article off TheRegister (of all places) and cry histeria.

In the last few months of 2004, SGI scored a big sales win with a Japanese science lab. They built, delivered, and setup an Itanium super computer running Linux. It is to be used for nuclear explosion simulations. What does this news tell us? Itanium DOES sell and it sells big.

Yes, I've read articles on TheRegister, but you have to take them with a grain of salt. For instance, I read on article that listed specific numbers and figures of workstations/servers shipped by HP, Dell, IBM. Without getting to specific on the numbers, suffice to say they were not impressive at all. Looking at those sales numbers you'd say they're puny compared to the many desktops and workstations sold every month.

We've established that the Itanium is not going to be sitting in the homes of Mom & Dad, and from the looks of things, it doesn't seem to be worthy of a 3D workstation either. That is not enough to say that it is dead. Sun with their Blade workstations, IBM has PPC workstations, even the once mighty SGI, they all appear to be losing workstation sales and you'd be lead to believe that is true because when you come to a place like CGTalk all you ever hear about is BoxxTech workstations, Alienware, a plethora of other names, and of course the DIY systems.

Sun and IBM have been making decent sales in the high-end area, a place many of us don't even hear much about. And I mentioned SGI's sale to the Japanese sci lab just to show that even they are still in business. To say that "Itanium will die because there's no Windows XP Pro for it" is complete FUD.

The impression I got from the TheRegister article that the first poster linked is: Miscrosoft is losing "it". Not Intel, and certainly not the Itanium. DEC Alpha workstations sold for many thousands, Alpha super computers and clusters sold for millions. Did they ever NEED a Windows OS to make those sales? Itanium is believed to be a successor to Alpha. Whether that's true or not, I don't know/care. There will forever be an OS and software solution for these high-end computing platforms, this is something MS completely lacks.

I'd call it death by a thousand cuts for Itanium.

The dream of bringing Itanium to the desktop has died. Back in the late 1990s Intel marketing was promoting Itanium as an eventual desktop replacement. Now even the server strategy is doubtful with Microsoft withdrawing clustering support. I guess there's still Linux.
If you're basing your opinions off of an article from TheRegister, you're not well enough informed. Ok so Itanium won't be any good on the desktop. EVERYONE knows this already, big deal. Intel will try to switch gears and aim for the super computing market. But they'll need their partners like HP, SGI. No one will cry over the loss of MS support for Itanium, trust me. There's people out there more happy with Itanium + Linux. Your "I guess there's still Linux" remark doesn't do it justice. Linux is what SAVED Itanium from an early death.

[DigiLusionist]

Look, Beamtracer starts these PC/Windows/Microsoft bashing threads all the time. Seems to get a lot of satisfaction from it. Why let him get you worked up, guys?

[Thalaxis]

Who cares, Windows sucks anyways. ( Here come the flames baby).
At least one company that used Windows as their exclusive OS for their servers adopted
Linux for their Itanium products. I think HP is the only Itanium vendor out there that is
selling Windows for Itanium, which is one out of a few dozen. :)

[Vertizor]

Look, Beamtracer starts these PC/Windows/Microsoft bashing threads all the time. Seems to get a lot of satisfaction from it. Why let him get you worked up, guys?
Oh... well... I didn't know that :blush:

Thalaxis use to bust my balls too, I try not to let people get to me though...

[Beamtracer]

Beamtracer starts these PC/Windows/Microsoft bashing threadsHi DigiLusionist.

I might have criticized Microsoft in the past, but I don't see this thread as bashing PCs. I'm a big fan of AMD processors. I'm a big fan of IBM processors. I think the growth of AMD is good, and will force Intel to make better processors. I just think that Intel made a very big mistake with the Itanium. Probably their biggest mistake.

You free to state that Itanium is the biggest success of the processor industry, if that's what you think, and you won't get any insults from me.

That's what it's about. Divergent opinions. As long as everyone is polite.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.