Re: 64-bit transition deadline (Re: Etch in the hands of the Stable Release Managers)
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:13:07PM -0400, Matthias Julius wrote:
>
> I don't think it needs win64-only games. It just needs games that run
> with a 10% higher frame rate on win64 to create demand. Or on
> Linux-amd64.
Not even that. The hype factor is enough to create demand, but this kind of
demand is not enough to convince most gamers into throwing away all their
old hardware. If there's a win64-only killer app, that could be different.
> > Yes, but Microsoft is much farther. I wouldn't be surprised if our 64-bit
> > userbase outnumbered win64's already.
>
> And MS doesn't care. As long as users don't switch to Linux because
> they need a working 64bit system. This might be the case for servers
> but not for desktop systems. People just stay with win32 if they can
> not have win64 drivers for their hardware.
And if they stay with win32 (+ pae) for too long, a new, small 64-bit
niche will be stablished.
> > When 64-bit computing as a whole starts to become significant,
> > they'll start to be interested in either of these platforms.
>
> It will be a while before that happens for desktop computers. So far
> it doesn't provide a real advantage for the average desktop computer.
As soon as the average desktop has 8 GiB, some of the vendors will want to
ditch the uglyness of win32+pae and go 64-bit.
--
Robert Millan
My spam trap is honeypot@aybabtu.com. Note: this address is only intended
for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.
Reply to: