To: Gary Ng who wrote (131594 ) 4/6/2001 12:58:53 AM From: Rob Young Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 186894 "IA64 systems at $25 billion in 2003" --- All happy thinking. Everyone wants to jump out there and suppose this baby is really going to take off. Look at another 2003 prediction for IA64:linleygroup.com March 2000 Even if IA-64 processors merely match the performance of their RISC competitors, they are likely to dominate the workstation and server markets, achieving a market share in excess of 60% by 2003. And yet, 7 months later, whistling a new tune:eetimes.com October 2000 Itanium will still make a splash in the server market. But I expect most Itanium systems sold next year will be used for software development or in customer validation; volume deployment will occur only at a limited number of sites. ... McKinley, not Itanium, will determine the fate of IA-64. If McKinley meets its performance promises, IA-64 may yet dominate the server market. ["Yet?" What happened to 60% in 2003? Florida election officials counting those potential dangling McKinley sales?] But if McKinley doesn't deliver, IA-64 isn't going to get a third chance. [Why not? Doesn't it take Microsoft 3 rounds to get it right?] --- Diminished expectations within 7 months. More importantly, we see that in March Y2K Linley is fed and regurgitates "60% market share in 2003". The server space today is $60 billion, which means with zero growth Intel will be doing $36 billion in Itanium/Itanium+ server sales in 2003. But now another analyst is fed $25 billion as the goalposts shift. So maybe we are down to 25% of the market in 2003. This time next year the numbers will line up so that we will be down to 10% of the market in 2003 and no one will be any wiser. Or so the reasoning goes. . . Rob