Originally posted by Un4given
If Intel wants IA-64 to be truly and quickly successful, in my opinion, they need to make the CPU capable of executing x86 code without taking a performance hit compared to the CPU that they just replaced. People aren't going to be really keen on replacing every piece of software they own to support native IA-64 language, or take a hit in performance compared to their previous CPU when executing their existing software.
Putting full hardware x86 support would be just about the most counter-intuitive thing Intel could do. When you say the CPU that they just replaced...what do you mean by that? IA-64 is entirely different line of high end CPUs that Intel had no predecessor to. Xeon was probably the closest and it was a mile away from what IA-64 is. People that buy IA-64 system will not care about replacing existing software. In fact, if Intel can get a few select programs over to IA-64, they'll have the software issue settled. AFAIK, they've already done this with Oracle, Unix etc., and that's really all they need.

IA-64 doesn't need a IA-64 version of AOL IM to succeed. It needs server applications and as far as that goes, Intel's done their fair share.

The fact of the matter is that moving to IA-64 wouldn't be that much more difficult then say getting any new line of servers and upgrading software. For example, say you operate a datacenter and your running a few key aps, namely Unix/Linux, Oracle, DB2 etc. If you need to update your servers, you would likely be looking into updating the software as well. What difference does it make if you go USIII, Power, Alpha or IA-64 if they all support the same or similar aps and your total cost of upgrade won't be that different or important between the choices? The answer then is simple, it comes down to if the IA-64 platform itself can compete with the others. Intel is a proven name, but even they have never been in a market this high up, and thats going to be the true test.

IA-64 in its current form will never become a desktop ISA. It can however contribute to elements of a desktop ISA in the extended future. x86 support was something Intel threw in there to maintain a continutity they haven't lost since their first IC 4004. If ones buying an Itanium or McKinley server for x86 applications, then they're doing it for all the wrong reasons and their IT group has the combined intelligence of a dead fish.