[ianhanschen]

Can you call it Itanic if it was around for more than a decade because of how well it sold and how many supercomputers chose to use it? I am familiar with the pain of Itanium, and I understand how hard it was to work with. I've kernel debugged an operating system on it. Yet it was still successful enough to be around for this long. I wouldn't call it "Itanic."

[kstrauser]

> Can you call it Itanic if it was around for more than a decade because of how well it sold

It didn't sell well, though. At all.

> and how many supercomputers chose to use it?

Here's a chart of supercomputer architecture by year: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Processor_families_i...

Itanium showed up around 2001, peaked in 2003 at about 100 systems, and was nearly gone by 2007.

However good it might have been hypothetically -- and I contend that it wasn't -- it was a market disaster.