Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Fortune has an interesting article about the Intel Itanium 2. I've been playing with a few Itanium 2 systems at work and they're incredibly fast. If Apple decides to switch away from the PowerPC architecture, maybe they should switch to the Itanium :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
Quite a good read indeed. I think by the sounds of it IBM will be able to give Intel a run for their money especially since they just opened the door for AMD to work/build with them in thier plants.

It will be interesting to see what happens when things start to heat up. I think Intel will have a hell of a time trying to convince companies that 64 bit is better than 32 bit processing and that its cool to make a leap of faith as they are asking and abandon their existing platforms with no way to run their existing software on the new chip.... that to me is just stupid. Thats like Apple saying here is Mac OS X and once installed you can no longer run Mac OS 9 apps....suicide. Just like Apple is doing, you need that transition period to allow the chip to prove itself to the people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
dthompson101 wrote:
I think Intel will have a hell of a time trying to convince companies that 64 bit is better than 32 bit processing and that its cool to make a leap of faith as they are asking and abandon their existing platforms with no way to run their existing software on the new chip.

Actually, you *can* run x86 binaries on an Itanium machine. We've run x86 client binaries against an Itanium server binary (and vice versa) on the same machine with no problems. The only issue is speed; an Itanium 2 800MHz runs x86 binaries about as fast as a P3 500.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
778 Posts
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Actually, you *can* run x86 binaries on an Itanium machine. We've run x86 client binaries against an Itanium server binary (and vice versa) on the same machine with no problems. The only issue is speed; an Itanium 2 800MHz runs x86 binaries about as fast as a P3 500. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, why would anyone want to run something like that that would more than kill the speed of the system? It makes no sense that people would want to spend more money to move slower....well I guess they actually did it with the P4 over the P3 so who knows.


Here is another link from zdnet about Apple and AMD introducing the 64 bit dekstop this year and Intel staying away from it. No realy ryhme or reason, just an interesting read.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
dthompson101 wrote:
Well, why would anyone want to run something like that that would more than kill the speed of the system?

It doesn't kill the speed of the system, just the speed of the emulated executable.

It makes no sense that people would want to spend more money to move slower....

Well, people buy Macs, don't they? :D

Seriously, though, I don't think the idea is to run x86-code at the same speed as Itanium-code. I think the idea is to provide a migration path from x86-based machines to Itanium-based machines. Most applications will probably be ported over to Itanium (it's a pretty trivial port, if your code is 64-bit clean and you don't use much assembler), but being able to run x86 binaries will allow users to run any applications that haven't been ported over to the Itanium yet.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
Linus Torvalds (who works for Transmetica) has some rather uncomplimentary things to say about Itanium (he's never been known for his tact).

Anyway, at The Inquirer (that's Inquirer-the-sister-of The Register, not the usually reliable source of Men In Black):
Linus Speaks Up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,198 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
gordguide wrote:
Linus Torvalds (who works for Transmetica) has some rather uncomplimentary things to say about Itanium (he's never been known for his tact).

Linus also has some rather uncomplimentary things to say about the PowerPC, too (in that the x86 is a lot nicer than the PPC). I've written both PowerPC and x86 assembler and both have their own set of interesting quirks, but I've not written enough to have a strong preference of one over the other.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
16 exabytes? Holy bleep.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,247 Posts
Oh, yeah. Linus absolutely hates the PowerPC, but he seems to be quieter now that Big Blue is onboard the Linux train.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top