On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM, <tlaronde@polynum.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 01:04:57PM -0400, erik quanstrom wrote:
> > On Thu Jul 26 11:18:04 EDT 2012, mirtchovski@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >  I liked it for the same reason I
> > > > liked those Cell processors - I'm weird.
> > >
> > > a lot of people really hated it because it killed alpha...
> >
> > credit where due.  itanic killed alpha.
> >
> > or more accurately, the politics behind itanic.
>
> And perhaps the conception too? about what was needed from the
> compiler and the programmer to really use the stuff. It seemed far
> too complex to be of sufficiently easy of use and large benefits to
> convince a lot of people to try. The doubtful description read in
> Hennesy and Patterson' "Computer Architecture" was fair enough.
>
> Not to speak about compatibility, the one feature that made Intel and
> Microsoft prosper...
>
> The Plan9 vs Unix is not in the very same pattern. If Itanium was
> doomed, the Plan9 approach seems to me more and more valid
> everyday---interconnections, ubiquity or lack of locality of
> resources; terminals vs. CPU vs. fileservers etc.
>
> And simplicity...
>
>
We'll just keep the fire lit then I suppose until people come to their
senses :-)



> --
>         Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
>                       http://www.kergis.com/
> Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
>
>