gollem, CombJelly, killing Itanium -
That really isn't a realistic expectation, at least not in simple terms. There are markets for Itanium, and even if Intel walked away from it then HP would continue to develope them for those markets.
A more reasonable goal is to keep Itanium off the desktop, and keep it upstairs as a low volume server product.
Succeeding in this goal means keeping the AMD64 perceived value and higher ASPs. Paradoxically, one way to do this is to keep the value line 32-bit for the next couple of years.
It is all about market positioning. AMD64 is aimed at the fat middle part of the market - the part which has both profits and volumes. I am perplexed by the AMD partisans who want to see the value of this compromised by driving it into the Celeron market as soon as possible.
I know the counter-argument that AMD needs to build a critical mass for 64-bit applications. That critical mass must be a set of users who can afford to purchase the best applications, whether it be games or databases. Not the most thrifty customers who are happy just to get a price break on last year's games. A critical mass of junk applications does no one any good (just ask Apple, which hasn't been able to build a critical set of valuable applications outside of Adobe graphics programs).
Once again, we are seeing the differences between Ruiz and Sanders. The company has been transforming over the past year under Ruiz, and the biggest sign of that is AMD's new strategy of protecting the value of their product.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
