Re: x86-64 port of debian/linux
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 12:50:37PM +0100, Russell Coker wrote:
> It was supposed to have become widely popular by now. It was supposed to be
> delivering much greater performance than it does.
> If you compare Intel's aims as announced 5 years ago with the current reality
> they it seems quite unsuccessful.
> Being 4 years late (16 "web years") seems rather unsuccessful to me.
I would say it's unsuccessful when they give up on it. So far, merely
unlikely and unimpressive.
> Also IA64 although started many years before IA32-64 is no closer to full use
> in the market. Until you can get white-box machines containing a CPU it
> really doesn't matter that much to the world. IA32-64 is probably closer to
> arriving on the main-stream market than IA64.
It's x86-64, or properly Athlon64, not IA32-64. I wish I knew why it had
become trendy to rename i386 to IA32.
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>