logoalt Hacker News

twoodfinlast Monday at 11:52 PM4 repliesview on HN

I would love to read the Microsoft PM spec for this product. Who in the world were they making it for?

Itanium never made it into the consumer-class hardware that was XP’s audience. AFAIK, Intel never even published a roadmap for that to happen!

Maybe a proof of concept they shipped as a demonstration of loyalty to Intel?!


Replies

walrus01yesterday at 12:18 AM

In approx. 2000 to 2002, 2003 or around then, there was a theoretical dream that Itanium based workstations would become a real mass market thing, but it obviously never caught on.

Intel never made Itanium CPUs cheap enough to realistically purchase and Itanium motherboards never became a thing from the top-10 sized Taiwanese motherboard makers (the same companies that were making really nice boards for the 1 GHz to 1.2 GHz socketed Pentium 3 with 512KB cache and the first generations of Pentium 4).

Also the performance sucked. This was before AMD64 existed on the corporate desktop or home desktop.

show 4 replies
mrpippyyesterday at 12:09 AM

There were Itanium workstations (https://www.openpa.net/systems/hp_i2000.html, https://www.openpa.net/systems/hp_zx2000.html), but of course these quickly crashed and burned with the rest of Itanium

ghaffyesterday at 12:41 AM

It's pretty simple. There was a point in the early 2000s (especially pre-AMD x64) when it was pretty broadly assumed that Itanium from Intel was going to inevitably win given that a 64-bit transition was inevitable (correct) and that it would happen on Intel's terms (incorrect).

sidewndr46yesterday at 11:30 AM

I believe efforts like this were funded by HP. It is why the Itanium was kept around for so long despite being dead on arrival.