Ricardo B (ricardo.b.delete@this.xxxxx.xx) on August 2, 2012 6:31 am wrote:
> Paul A. Clayton (paaronclayton.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 2, 2012 5:20 am
> wrote:
> > 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.)
>
> Maybe, maybe not.
> IBM's zSeries keeps living and
> being profitable on it's own, even though it requires a massive R&D effort,
> including specific CPUs.
>
> Does VMS and NonStop bring the same kind of
> revenue?
> And do they need the same kind of R&D effort or can they be ported
> to x86?
>

IPF revenues exceeded that of z series in the 2007/2008 era of peak IPF
sales but dropped slightly below in the post 2008 recession. Oracle's
campaign against IPF has pushed it distinctly under sales of z series
but not so far that a Poulson based refresh and HP strongly promoting
alternatives to Oracle software couldn't once again push it ahead although
that would depend on the overall health of the Unix server segment.