Re: em64t

["Robert Isaac" <rjisaac@gmail.com>]

On 10/8/06, Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 09:15:44AM -0500, Gnu_Raiz wrote:
> > It's now Intel 64, if that wasn't confusing enough.
> > http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34722
> >
> > So intel went from IA-32e to EM64T to Intel 64! I guess you know why upstream
> > left it amd64. I guess they suffer from the not invented here syndrome.
> >
> > For all those people who need to be special, you can always append-to-version
> > when you compile your own kernel.  But still it freaks out those who are not
> > knowledgeable to see a Woodcrest, or Conroe running something saying amd64.
> > You just got to love the irony in that.
>
> Does this mean intel wants their users even more confused by having
> Intel Architecture 64 and Intel 64 being two different incompatible
> things?  We already had people asking if ia64 for was em64t systems.
> What a mess.  I thought IA-32e was something entirely different (I
> thought that was PAE and such).

Yes, but their marketing scheme is such that the majority of people
that are going to purchase a new CPU will never have to know the
difference.  They'll just know that they're the "best" processors
around... just like the ads say.