Re: Well duh, it's no different from replacing existing servers with newer ones
It's really a lot harder to migrate to a different software base. A lot harder. If one of your servers is a dual processor PIII Xeon and the other is a PII, then all aspects of administration and configuration, particularly security and bug fix packs will be identical. If the two servers must use different binaries, and different OS versions, everything has to be tested and maintained as two different efforts. If you are maintaining dozens or hundreds of servers, especially if they are geographically dispersed, it's a lot easier if they can all run the same software.
Intel has come a long way in terms of catching up to Alpha's performance level, but for years it lagged far behind. Yet Alpha sales haven't been nearly as good as those of Intel X86 servers. Compatibility with the existing software base is the number one issue for hardware. If there were no alternative, it would be one thing, but Itanium/Mckinley/P4/Foster will be considered against Palamino/Sledgehammer. If Compaq offers up a choice between Itanium/Mckinley that requires all new software, P4/Foster that performs poorly without all new software, and Palamino/Sledgehammer that runs fine with the existing, proven, paid for, trained for, software that you're already using, it's going to be a real easy decision to make.
Dan |
