In announcing financial results for the fourth quarter and all of 2009 yesterday, Intel rejiggered its financial statements in such a way that we now have a better idea of how its PC and server businesses are doing in terms of revenues and profits. And, my oh my, did operating margins for both PC and server chips recover in the …
How did Itanium do?
Any news on how Itanium what for Intel's bottom line?
Itanium => irrelevant
As far as I can tell, documents on Intel's results page  do not mention Itanium or IA64, nor do the Intel speakers or the analysts in the webcast/con-call.
A few questions (not Itanium related) were deferred to the investor's meeting in May so maybe it'll rate a mention there.
So, it seems it's not making them significant loads of money, and (unlike WiMax recently where Intel wrote off $1B re their Clearwire investment) it's not costing them significant amounts of money yet either. Not yet anyway.
Itanium is to be discontinued
They're discontinuing Itanium. So after all that monopoly stuff to get manufacturers to buy inferior Intel Chips at the expense of Superior AMD chips and now they're cleaning up with the Nehelam chips which are superior (the game of leap frog is interesting to watch). Fun stuff when you come to think that AMD is about 5 years ahead of Intel. It'll be interesting to see what AMD comes up with next to leapfrog Intel.
"to be discontinued"
Where's Matt? Usually the fast response squad would have been in here at the slightest sniff of anybody doubting the glorious future of what was once going to be Intel's "industry standard 64 bit" family. He's not here. Does that mean the discontinuation announcement is actually on the way, or does it just mean he's otherwise occupied?
- Does Apple's iOS 7 make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA