▲ | zokier 8 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
It is worth noting that at the turn of the century x86 wasn't yet so utterly dominant yet. Alphas, PowerPC, MIPS, SPARC and whatnot were still very much a thing. So that is part why running x86 software was not as high priority, and maybe even compatibility with PA-RISC would have been a higher priority. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | Spooky23 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
The writing was on the wall once Linux was a thing. I did alot of solution design in that period. The only times there were good business cases in my world for not-x86 were scenarios where DBAs and some vertical software required Sun, and occasionally AIX or HPUX for license optimization or some weird mainframe finance scheme. The cost structure was just bonkers. I replaced a big file server environment that was like $2M of Sun gear with like $600k of HP Proliant. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
▲ | tliltocatl 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Well, according to some IA-64 was a planned flop with the whole purpose of undermining HP's supercomputer division. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
▲ | unethical_ban 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Is that true in 2000, especially as consumer PCs ramped up? |