javitron

5 ms·

1.
by javitron 3y ago
Well, maybe she should try communicating science while NOT playing a video game. That may be the issue making it hard?
2.
by javitron 3y ago
There is no "crisis in science" LOL. Talk about overblowing a few isolated data points trying to make them representative of whole fields.
3.
by javitron 3y ago
That makes no sense. Alpha was horrible in terms of power consumption.
4.
by javitron 3y ago
It is a great representation of the average article written about Itanium. I think the register made most of its revenue from articles about Itanium, where the authors had no clue about what they were talking about. Not defending Itanium. B
5.
by javitron 3y ago
The irony being that Itanium is basically a SPARC64 on steroids; both wide, both used huge register windows, and both were in order. the only difference being that Itanium exposed a lot of the superscalar bits to the programmer. I still hav
6.
by javitron 3y ago
Alpha was on life support by the time Compaq bought DEC. AXP was literally one of the things that basically killed DEC. By the time HP bought Compaq, AXP was on legacy mode. Plus Itanium was as much of an HP architecture as it was intel&#x2
7.
by javitron 3y ago
What killed Alpha and high performance MIPS (And eventually SPARC) was simple economics; their design costs grew faster than the revenue they generated. I don't think many of the arm chair CPU experts really understand how expensive it
8.
by javitron 3y ago
P4 was also, initially, process-driven. The fab side of Intel had a huge priority in setting early architectural themes. And some of the CMOs flows in lab, in mid 90s, were showing huge speed scaling, but they had very restrictive design ru
9.
by javitron 3y ago
Intel has some of the best architecture and design teams in the industry. They have had failed products, no doubt. But I don't think you understand also how insanely good at execution Intel was during the 80s and 90s.
10.
by javitron 3y ago
Itanium was being defined around the same time the 1st Alphas came to market. By the time Itanium2 came out, it matched/surpassed the contemporary AXP parts. FWIW the alpha design teams ended up cannibalized between AMD and Intel. The
11.
by javitron 3y ago
The compilers worked just fine. Itanium was not even that particularly VLIWish, as the instruction carrier wasn't that particularly wide (up to 4 instructions) All that Itanium was, at the end of the day, was an in-order PA-RISC/S
12.
by javitron 3y ago
LOL I am always fascinated by the soap opera scripts some people come up when it comes to stuff like this. Y'all be so let down if you knew how boring and much more pragmatic/economics driven the real stories, behind how these sau
13.
by javitron 3y ago
The file versioning in OpenVMS is really not that powerful. It also led to it's own set of issues, specially in terms of space waste. Also VMS had their own issues when it came to it's filesystem(s).
14.
by javitron 3y ago
Yeah, and Unix originally ran on a PDP with 256KB of RAM. Alas...
15.
by javitron 3y ago
I don't think OpenVMS has run on VAX for a very long time.