Merced -> Itanium.
Zalman Stern
Unobtanium?
-Z-
Mike Smith
news:7tb4kh$a...@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com...
> I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz version
> Unobtanium?
Maybe they should license "Turbonium" from VW.
--
Mike Smith
There are perhaps 5% of the population that simply *can't* think.
There are another 5% who *can*, and *do*.
The remaining 90% *can* think, but *don't*.
-- R. A. Heinlein
Dave Schreiber
Zalman Stern <zal...@netcom14.netcom.com> wrote:
>I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz version
>Unobtanium?
For a bit of context to the above, here's a link to the press release,
etc.:
<http://www.intel.com/eBusiness/enabling/itanium.htm>
--
Dave Schreiber "Can money pay for all the days
so...@dks2.net I lived awake but half asleep?"
^^^^^ ^^^^ -Primitive Radio Gods (SOaBPBwMiMH)
(For my e-mail address, swap the ^^^'d parts and remove the "2")
Rob Barris
wrote:
> In article <7tb4kh$a...@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>,
> Zalman Stern <zal...@netcom14.netcom.com> wrote:
> >I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz version
> >Unobtanium?
If they went with that name, the majority of Intel employees might stage
"a mutini"
Rob
Robert Harley
> I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. [...]
Thus spake the anagram generator:
Itanium for e-Business <-> Ruinous - benefit amiss
R
Robert Harley
Culled from the first few responses on Slashdot:
>Itanic
>It offers the deprecatory "sh" prefix, all too easily.
>Intel Itanium = Lame Unit In I.T.
R
Toon Moene
>
> Culled from the first few responses on Slashdot:
>
> >Itanic
>
> >It offers the deprecatory "sh" prefix, all too easily.
Hmmm, the `t' prefix seems more likely, to me.
Merced, a disaster of titanic proportions.
--
Toon Moene (to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl)
Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands
Phone: +31 346 214290; Fax: +31 346 214286
GNU Fortran: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/g77_news.html
Maynard Handley
<to...@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> wrote:
>Robert Harley wrote:
>>
>> Culled from the first few responses on Slashdot:
>>
>> >Itanic
>>
>> >It offers the deprecatory "sh" prefix, all too easily.
>
>Hmmm, the `t' prefix seems more likely, to me.
>
> Merced, a disaster of titanic proportions.
All fun and games, but people laughed at the Pentium name too. Lots of
moaning about how 586 was good enough. That name change seems to have
worked out pretty well for Intel.
Conclusion---architects commenting on IA-64 and Merced engineering details
makes sense, but unless one of us has real-world experience in what makes
certain names and brands appeal to the world, let's leave names to the
marketing people.
Maynard
Peter Seebach
Bruce Hoult <bruce...@pobox.com> wrote:
>It seems different this time. I don't recall anyone laughing at the
>Pentium name as a laughable thing in itself.
I do, but we got used to it. It sure did sound funny...
>Does even *one* person here think that "Itanium" was a good name?
I doubt it; it's phonetically ugly.
-s
--
Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / se...@plethora.net
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/
Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam!
David T. Wang
: hand...@ricochet.net (Maynard Handley) wrote:
: > All fun and games, but people laughed at the Pentium name too. Lots of
: > moaning about how 586 was good enough. That name change seems to have
: > worked out pretty well for Intel.
: It seems different this time. I don't recall anyone laughing at the
: Pentium name as a laughable thing in itself. The jibes concerned whether
: there was a need to use a name instead of a number at all, and humourous
: speculation on what the follow-up name would be (especially given mixing
: latin and greek).
I recall a lot of confusion, and people saying "huh?" at the Pentium
name.
: Time has of course shown that even Intel couldn't come up with another
: word name -- or at least one that would be better than just tacking "pro",
: "II", "III" onto the end of "Pentium".
And ofcourse Celeron and Xeon, and now AMD has joined the party with
the latest in a series of dumb names.
: > Conclusion---architects commenting on IA-64 and Merced engineering details
: > makes sense, but unless one of us has real-world experience in what makes
: > certain names and brands appeal to the world, let's leave names to the
: > marketing people.
: Does even *one* person here think that "Itanium" was a good name?
Does it matter what a bunch of programmers/architects/designers think
about a marketing name?
--
main(){char *a[]={"Illogical.","Balderdash.","Non sequitur.","Incorrect.",
"See what I mean?","Irrelevant.","Poppycock."};for(;;)puts(a[rand()%7]);}
Stefan Monnier <foo@acm.com>
> Does even *one* person here think that "Itanium" was a good name?
I don't about "good" (especially given that I don't know if the leading
"i" should be pronounced as in "idea" or as in "integer"), but I can see
two (dubiously) positive aspects:
- it starts with "i" like "intel" (could be spelt "iTanium")
- it can be made to sound somewhat like "internet".
Stefan
Bruce Hoult
hand...@ricochet.net (Maynard Handley) wrote:
> All fun and games, but people laughed at the Pentium name too. Lots of
> moaning about how 586 was good enough. That name change seems to have
> worked out pretty well for Intel.
It seems different this time. I don't recall anyone laughing at the
Pentium name as a laughable thing in itself. The jibes concerned whether
there was a need to use a name instead of a number at all, and humourous
speculation on what the follow-up name would be (especially given mixing
latin and greek).
Time has of course shown that even Intel couldn't come up with another
word name -- or at least one that would be better than just tacking "pro",
"II", "III" onto the end of "Pentium".
> Conclusion---architects commenting on IA-64 and Merced engineering details
> makes sense, but unless one of us has real-world experience in what makes
> certain names and brands appeal to the world, let's leave names to the
> marketing people.
Does even *one* person here think that "Itanium" was a good name?
-- Bruce
Andy Newman
>Conclusion---architects commenting on IA-64 and Merced engineering details
>makes sense, but unless one of us has real-world experience in what makes
>certain names and brands appeal to the world, let's leave names to the
>marketing people.
Good points. Never underestimate the power of the marketing dept!
The branded name needs a few properties - not rude or silly in any
language (sometimes quite difficult), not similar to another company's
trademark, unique enough that it stands out (and Itanium does at least
stand out ;) so they can market the *shit* out of it (TV ads for micro-
processor chips, never thought I'd see that).
--
Chuck Berry lied about the promised land
Dave Hansen
<monnier+comp/arch/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Hoult <bruce...@pobox.com> writes:
>> Does even *one* person here think that "Itanium" was a good name?
>
>I don't about "good" (especially given that I don't know if the leading
>"i" should be pronounced as in "idea" or as in "integer"), but I can see
I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value. Witness the
credit card companies, desperate to introduce a more exclusive card
than their "platinum" cards (previously introduced to exceed the
"gold" cards) are now pitching "titanium" cards. (What's next,
osmium?)
>two (dubiously) positive aspects:
>- it starts with "i" like "intel" (could be spelt "iTanium")
>- it can be made to sound somewhat like "internet".
Or "Information Technology," i.e. "IT", with the "ium" suffix to
remind you of Pentium. Still dubious, though.
Regards,
-=Dave
Just my (10-010) cents
I can barely speak for myself, so I certainly can't speak for B-Tree.
Change is inevitable. Progress is not.
Matt Reilly
A friend came across a nearly shredded chunk of paper blowing
across a sidewalk in a bay area town (name withheld). I've removed
the headers and blocked out the name of the originator to protect the
identity of all parties involved.
I'm not absolutely sure what company it really came from, but
I can take a guess at the company and the product they were trying
to name.
matt
(As always, I don't speak for my employers unless they're paying
me for it. Whoever they are.)
----------------------------------------------------------------
To: New Product Naming Committee
From: zzzzz z. zzzzzzzz
I finished setting up the database for our AutoName V2.3
last night. Twelve hours later, AN had come up with just ten names.
The trend doesn't look good. We'd better start working up a list of
names on our own.
As most of you know, AutoName builds a database of company
characteristics, product information, and local cultural attributes
by scanning product brochures, press releases, internal memoranda,
just about anything in text form. Last night AN scanned the e-mail
backup archives and built a database tailored to our operation.
The database combined with specific product information has
yielded the following list so far. (As I've said, I think we should
probably abandon this path: I really don't like the trend here.)
Repentium
Monopolium
Huncocrapium
Hyperium
Uberhype
Trajedia
Rustoleum
Rehashium
Komitium
Dominatium
Agilentium
This doesn't look good. I'll bring the updated list to the
afternoon meeting. We've got to come up with something soon.
--
Linux Rules!
Linux on Alpha Rules Bigtime!
Chris Brown
Dave Hansen <dha...@btree.com> wrote:
>I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
>which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value.
And lightbulbs?
--
/* _ */main(int k,char**n){char*i=k&1?"+L*;99,RU[,RUo+BeKAA+BECACJ+CAACA"
/* / ` */"CD+LBCACJ*":1[n],j,l=!k,m;do for(m=*i-48,j=l?m/k:m%k;m>>7?k=1<<m+
/* | */8,!l&&puts(&l)**&l:j--;printf(" \0_/"+l));while((l^=3)||l[++i]);}
/* \_,hris Brown -- All opinions expressed are probably wrong. */
Chris Brown
Chris Brown <Chris.omitt...@arm.andthisbit.com> wrote:
>In article <37fca8d7....@192.168.2.34>,
>Dave Hansen <dha...@btree.com> wrote:
>>I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
>>which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value.
>
>And lightbulbs?
Sorry, that's tungsten. Just ignore me and I'll go back to sleep. :-)
Brian Drummond
(David T. Wang) wrote:
>Bruce Hoult (bruce...@pobox.com) wrote:
>: hand...@ricochet.net (Maynard Handley) wrote:
>
>: > All fun and games, but people laughed at the Pentium name too. Lots of
>: > moaning about how 586 was good enough. That name change seems to have
>: > worked out pretty well for Intel.
>
>: It seems different this time. I don't recall anyone laughing at the
>: Pentium name as a laughable thing in itself. The jibes concerned whether
>: there was a need to use a name instead of a number at all,
>I recall a lot of confusion, and people saying "huh?" at the Pentium
>name.
but given their inability to copyright a number, the "need" was real
enough.
>: Time has of course shown that even Intel couldn't come up with another
>: word name -- or at least one that would be better than just tacking "pro",
>: "II", "III" onto the end of "Pentium".
>
>And ofcourse Celeron and Xeon, and now AMD has joined the party with
>the latest in a series of dumb names.
On the other hand...
how else could AMD have taken shots at both "pent"ium AND "dec" with one
stone?
(the dual processor configuration is rather obvious too)
- Brian
Pete Smoot
> I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
> which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value.
I mentioned the new name to my wife last night. She got the titanium
association, but (when I mentioned it's supposed to invoke images of
strength and durability) asked "Titanium does that?"
Why does the marketing department of the Sirius Cybernetics
Corporation spring to mind? Share and Enjoy!
-- Pete Smoot
Pinnacle Systems
Chris Russ
> On 06 Oct 1999 17:48:44 -0400, "Stefan Monnier <f...@acm.com>"
> <monnier+comp/arch/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu> wrote:
>
>
> Witness the
> credit card companies, desperate to introduce a more exclusive card
> than their "platinum" cards (previously introduced to exceed the
> "gold" cards) are now pitching "titanium" cards. (What's next,
> osmium?)
My favorites are:
43 Tc Technetium (Radioactive!!!! NFIN == Not Found In Nature)
38 Sr Strongtium (paint this inside a cobalt bomb, eh?)
Then we can start getting silly:
59 Pr Praseodymium (Prosaic? maybe not)
94 Pu Plutonium (One of the most poisonous substances known to man!)
97 Bk Berkelium
98 Cf Californium (Big, heavy, radioactive with a very short half-life)
Too bad this one is taken:
14 Si Silicon
-Chris Russ
Paul DeMone
Zalman Stern wrote:
>
> I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz version
> Unobtanium?
Its all unobtainium for now. BTW, the new name for merced is about
all the information that came out of Intel's double slot presentation
at MPF. BTW, Peter Bannon of Compaq came up with best line I heard
all week: "EPIC stands for Expects Perfectly Intuitive Compilers".
Fred Pollack of Intel let slip with "Merced has more pipe stages
than we orginally had envisioned" <grin>
>
> -Z-
--
Paul W. DeMone The 801 experiment SPARCed an ARMs race of EPIC
Kanata, Ontario proportions to put more PRECISION and POWER into
dem...@mosaid.com architectures with MIPSed results but ALPHA's well
pde...@igs.net that ends well.
Chris Cox
Chris.omitt...@arm.andthisbit.com (Chris Brown) wrote:
> In article <7ticov$c...@sis.cambridge.arm.com>,
> Chris Brown <Chris.omitt...@arm.andthisbit.com> wrote:
> >In article <37fca8d7....@192.168.2.34>,
> >Dave Hansen <dha...@btree.com> wrote:
> >>I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
> >>which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value.
> >
> >And lightbulbs?
>
> Sorry, that's tungsten. Just ignore me and I'll go back to sleep. :-)
Titanium -- as in, white paint (Titanium (di)Oxide).
Chris
Jan Vorbrueggen
> 94 Pu Plutonium (One of the most poisonous substances known to man!)
Well, yes, if you are stupid enough to inhale it in power form, and wait a few
years for cancer to develop. In that case, I suggest you take a similar dose
of Botulinus toxin, which would kill you in a minute or two, and be massive
overkill.
OT, I know.
Jan
Robert Barris
IIRC "Pu" is deadly for its chemical behavior once inhaled, the
radioactivity is secondary at that point.
Rob
Ketil Z Malde
> In article <37fca8d7....@192.168.2.34>,
> Dave Hansen <dha...@btree.com> wrote:
> >I suspect it's as in "idea," the goal being to remind you of titanium,
> >which is supposed to evoke images of strength and value.
> And lightbulbs?
No, but frying pans.
Or perhaps it's bicycles?
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
Paul Dietz
Robert Barris <rba...@netcom.com> wrote:
> IIRC "Pu" is deadly for its chemical behavior once inhaled, the
> radioactivity is secondary at that point.
This is a common myth. No, the danger is due to its
radioactivity. Its chemistry is important in that
it affects how/where the element stays in the body,
and so affects the radiation dose.
Paul
Dave Hansen
[...]
>Titanium -- as in, white paint (Titanium (di)Oxide).
So it's all just a whitewash?
Toon Moene
> In article <handleym-061...@handma3.apple.com>,
> hand...@ricochet.net (Maynard Handley) wrote:
> > All fun and games, but people laughed at the Pentium name too. Lots of
> > moaning about how 586 was good enough. That name change seems to have
> > worked out pretty well for Intel.
> It seems different this time. I don't recall anyone laughing at the
> Pentium name as a laughable thing in itself.
Are you sure ? Doesn't "The Fifth" has any connotations of doom for you
?
It was pretty clear why Intel couldn't go on with calling it (x++)86 -
they weren't allowed to trademark a number.
Maynard Handley
(Robert Barris) wrote:
>In article <y4aepux...@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,
>Jan Vorbrueggen <j...@mailhost.neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote:
>>Chris Russ <jc...@aol.com> writes:
>>
>>> 94 Pu Plutonium (One of the most poisonous substances known to man!)
>>
>>Well, yes, if you are stupid enough to inhale it in power form, and wait a few
>>years for cancer to develop. In that case, I suggest you take a similar dose
>>of Botulinus toxin, which would kill you in a minute or two, and be massive
>>overkill.
>
>IIRC "Pu" is deadly for its chemical behavior once inhaled, the
>radioactivity is secondary at that point.
HOWEVER, is this chemical poisonousness substantially larger than that of
other inorganics that don't have the glamor of radioactivity (like arsenic
or cyanide). And if it is substantially more toxic (ie toxic in lower
doses), what's the mode of operation? Some strange fluke like the atom
just happens to be the right size to slide into some key enzyme and gum it
up?
Maynard
Rob Barris
hand...@ricochet.net (Maynard Handley) wrote:
http://www.uilondon.org/ci3_plu.htm says, "no worse than any other heavy
metal if ingested". My bad..
Rob
M. Ranjit Mathews
> Zalman Stern wrote:
> >
> > I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz version
> > Unobtanium?
Why didn't they call it Sexium ?
> Its all unobtainium for now.
It's jinxed. Hexium, that is.
Joe Pfeiffer
>
> I propose Capsicum!
Now, there's a hot idea! (note where I'm posting from)
--
Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
Natarajan Krishnaswami
> It's jinxed. Hexium, that is.
I propose Capsicum!
<N/>
--
I feel so semantic today...
-- Eric A. Meyer
simon...@my-deja.com
called 'Cache la Poudre' (hide the powder).
Zalman Stern wrote:
> I'd write more, but I'm laughing too hard. Will they call the 1GHz
> version Unobtanium?
>
> -Z-
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Thomas Tonino
> http://www.uilondon.org/ci3_plu.htm says, "no worse than any other heavy
> metal if ingested". My bad..
Sure... we do not believe what Intel tells us, so why would we believe
this intitute. To quote http://www.uilondon.org/ui-info.htm "The
Institute promotes the peaceful use of nuclear energy..."
Alpha particles may get stopped by a glove, but that is not the end of
the story. Enery is conserved when thes particles hit your glove and
lead to heating and emission of gamma radiation.
Still I do believe that most of Plutonium's danger is radiological, not
chemical. But I wouldn't ingest any of it, thank you, even though the
Uranium Institute claims: "In commercial power plant or research
applications, plutonium generally exists as the compound plutonium
dioxide (PuO2), a very stable ceramic material which is extremely
insoluble in water or body fluids, reducing the chemical toxicity to
negligible levels, unless inhaled."
Thomas
Sander Vesik
>> IIRC "Pu" is deadly for its chemical behavior once inhaled, the
>> radioactivity is secondary at that point.
> This is a common myth. No, the danger is due to its
> radioactivity. Its chemistry is important in that
> it affects how/where the element stays in the body,
> and so affects the radiation dose.
It's chemistry makes it go to the places you want it least, or namely
bone marrow, liver, ...
> Paul
Martin Knoblauch
>
>Why didn't they call it Sexium ?
>
now, aren't they american? That would make "Sex" a very un-PC prefix.
Martin
Maynard Handley
<tto...@bio.vu.nl> wrote:
>Rob Barris wrote:
>
>> http://www.uilondon.org/ci3_plu.htm says, "no worse than any other heavy
>> metal if ingested". My bad..
>
>Sure... we do not believe what Intel tells us, so why would we believe
>this intitute. To quote http://www.uilondon.org/ui-info.htm "The
>Institute promotes the peaceful use of nuclear energy..."
>
>Alpha particles may get stopped by a glove, but that is not the end of
>the story. Enery is conserved when thes particles hit you