Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
HP Intel Oracle The Courts Hardware

HP Sues Oracle For Dropping Itanium Support 153

Posted by samzenpus
from the unplanned-obsolescence dept.
Fudge Factor 3000 writes "HP is suing Oracle for a breach of contract, claiming that Oracle was contractually obliged to continue supporting the Itanium architecture, which they recently nixed support for. Oracle has fired back that Itanium is essentially a dead architecture and will soon be discontinued by Intel. And so the blood feud continues between Oracle and HP."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

HP Sues Oracle For Dropping Itanium Support

Comments Filter:
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Thursday June 16, 2011 @05:57AM (#36460488)

    and any other company following this issue is that they're essentially at the mercy of the business decisions of a third company, Intel, and that's not a very smart business position to get in in the first place.

  • Re:MAKES SENSE !! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968@@@gmail...com> on Thursday June 16, 2011 @07:03AM (#36460786) Journal

    I think the bigger question is this....why is Intel continuing to beat the obviously VERY dead horse that is Itanic? Its a giant flop, YOU know this, I know this, and Oracle knows this as well, so why continue to waste R&D for a chip that barely has even a teeny tiny niche and is being phased out by almost everyone?

    The problem with Itanium is that Intel bet they could not only get everyone to abandon literally billions of lines of already paid for X86 code, but that they could build a compiler able to keep it fed and do all the heavy lifting and in the end they just weren't able to deliver compared to X86-64. Like it or not for many jobs X86 will be here to stay for a long time and Itanium was never a real contender.

    So why are they wasting their money? It isn't like they don't have a very valuable product line to replace it, where money is no object Xeon rules the roost in performance by a pretty big margin in servers, just as in the desktop for sheer power the i series owns the top end (for the rest of us Opteron and Phenom work just fine, thanks) so what is the point? it isn't like they are gonna magically get everyone to suddenly drop X86-64, POWER, and Sparc, all of which are beating the Itanic, and just the fact that I can say itanic and everyone knows what I mean just shows the chip has a bad rep. Let it die already Intel, throw HP a sweetheart deal to say you're sorry for the oopsie and just let the thing die already.

  • Re:MAKES SENSE !! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by antifoidulus (807088) on Thursday June 16, 2011 @07:38AM (#36460958) Homepage Journal
    I doubt they are doing too much R&D on it, they are mainly just manufacturing the CPUs(in small quantities I'm sure) so they don't anger existing customers. They only stopped making 486s in 2007(those most of those were for embedded applications)

    Also, just my 2 cents, Itanium didn't fail because compilers couldn't effectively utilize it, it failed because VLIW was an academic experiment that got waaaaaaaaaay out of hand. While compilers certainly could have utilized it better, they cannot violate the fundamental constraint of ensuring at COMPILE TIME that no 2 instructions being executed simultaneously have any data or execution dependencies. Compare that with the superscalar design used by most CPUs today: they can use runtime behavior to predict jumps, data dependencies etc. While backing out an instruction that was partially executed is costly, modern superscalar designs have to do it so rarely that the little bit of performance penalty for such instructions pales in comparison with the gains you get when you execute multiple instructions simultaneously that *might* have a dependency, something VLIW simply cannot do.

"Go to Heaven for the climate, Hell for the company." -- Mark Twain

Working...