2010/1/18 Zoran Popović <[email protected]>
> I would imagine other vendors would offer me migration roadmap [...] > [B]eing informed years ahead what exact option he has. > > I've don't think I'm mis-quoting with those two phrases, but there are two separate things here. A migration "roadmap" (for want of a better word) and being informed well in advance. You have a migration roadmap: it's implicit in the platform: the self-same operating system is available on Itanium and on x86_64. The same apps (more-or-less) are available on both; isn't migration straightfoward? I can't answer that, you'd have to ask the people responsible for the apps on your systems. You have also been informed well in advance. RHEL5 support will continue until 2014 and RHEL6 hasn't even been announced as a beta yet. Do you expect your existing Itanium servers to keep running after 2014? I'm sure you can pay Red Hat to provide continued support after 2014 if that's the case -- ask Red Hat. And you haven't invested in Itanium for RHEL6 have you? I haven't seen a chorus of people calling for RHEL6 on Itanium either here or anywhere else. In fact I don't think I have seen anyone but you bemoaning this decision. Have you told your Red Hat contact what you think? What did they say (if its not under some NDA)? I wouldn't be at all surprised if the decision was that it's not economically sound to support a dwindling platform, that the sales of Itanium licenses don't justify the development costs. Technically, it's a shame. Both Alpha and Itanium will be missed by many, but both have missed the boat. jch
_______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
