Gabriele Svelto (gabriele.svelto.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 2, 2012 1:00 am wrote:
> mpx (mpx.delete@this.nomail.pl) on August 2, 2012 12:20 am wrote:
> > It looks like Itanium is dead anyway:
>
> > "Ultimately we’ve got to build Unix
> > on a Xeon chip, and so we will do that." HP CEO Meg
> > Whitman
> >
> > http://allthingsd.com/20120605/hewlett-packard-ceo-meg-whitman-has-a-lot-to-say/
>
> Wasn't this statement later denied by HP? There was a previous
> project for porting HP-UX to x86 but it was apparently axed at some point in the
> past.

http://h30507.www3.hp.com/t5/Mission-Critical-Computing-Blog/Got-Questions-About-HP-Project-Odyssey-Single-Platform-Mission/ba-p/103473

The above link indicates that the "UNIX" for x86 (in Project Odyssey) will be Linux. HP-UX will remain on Itanium.

This seems to further marginalize HP-UX. If RAS features are somewhat quickly migrated into x86 systems and Linux (and Windows), the relative advantages of Itanium+HP-UX would seem to shrink (especially since RAS features do not seem to advance that rapidly--even a two-year delay in migration of RAS features might not be that significant).

A decline of HP-UX sales would seem to be rather bad news for VMS and NonStop users. If HP is unwilling to support migration of HP-UX to x86, there might be justified concerns about the continued life of the less popular Itanium OSes. (Migration from HP-UX to Linux is probably much easier than a migration from VMS to Linux, so moving HP-UX to x86 might not be perceived as worthwhile but a greater life extension might be considered for VMS.)