Kevin G (kevin.delete@this.cubitdesigns.com) on August 1, 2012 7:08 pm wrote:
> Kira (kirsc.delete@this.aeterna.ru) on August 1, 2012 3:44 pm wrote:
> > David
> Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on August 1, 2012 1:02 pm
> >
> wrote:
> > > Good news for HP, Intel, Itanium, customers and nearly
> everyone.
> > Bad news for
> > > Oracle
> > > though.
> > >
>
> > >
> > http://www.realworldtech.com/hp-wins-lawsuit-vs-oracle/
> >
> >
> > > Comments
> >
> > > and discussion welcome!
> > >
>
> > > David
> >
> > Reading the text of the
> > ruling as posted
> on HP's website, it looks like it probably includes OEL (5.5
> > was current
> on the date mentioned, and supported IPF.) Does this mean that OEL 6
> > is
> going to be legally required to be ported to Itanium?

RHEL 6/Centos 6/Scientific Linux 6/OEL 6 has never been supported on Itanium. It would take a very weird ruling to require the support of something completely new on Itanium. Surely Oracle just need to keep providing support for 5.x. I assume if RedHat still have customers running 5.x on Itanium they will keep providing updates for Itanium, and Oracle can feed those into OEL 5.x. I wonder how many of those customers RedHat actually has?

> Depends on the original
> contract between HP and Oracle. Considering this ruling, it likely does. HP
> could use the Linux support since RedHat dropped Itanium support.
>
> Now I'm
> curious what agreements existed between HP and MS for Windows support since they
> dropped support after Windows 2008R2.

HP will only care about Windows support if their customer base cares about it. So far it would appear they don't, so its not going to create any practical friction between HP and MS.

Steve