Replies to post #26727 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[HailMary]

IPF is not behind, it's ahead.

Do you see IPF as being a profitable venture at this point? Most of the money is made in Xeons. I just don't see how IPF can ever make up for the money sunk into it now that it won't be hitting mainstream computing which was an original goal of this architecture. It could have made up for all the investment had it been properly pushed into the mainstream earlier. AMD would have been put out to pasture if that happened as they have no cross license for it. Intel can keep it alive, and even grow the market niche, but I just don't believe it can be self sustaining.

[Dan3]

Re: IPF is not behind, it's ahead.

I think you're confusing your behind with your ahead.

Could you have inadvertently gotten one stuck in the other?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(aw c'mon, it's funny!)

[j3pflynn]

wbmw - it sounded to me(and apparently to many others) like you were saying that none of the big databases had been ported to AMD64.

"My point is that IPF does have the support of the major databases, while AMD64/IA32E/x86-64 does not."

I knew that you knew better than that, since I consider you to probably be more informed on that subject than I, and I knew they had been. So your statement seemed rather suspect in its motives in the context of your historically demonstrated level of awareness in the area.
Paul