Re: [OT I think] Which Distro?
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 05:35:50PM +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> > I imagine the arguments where similar when operating systems moved from 16
> > bit to 32 bit. ;)
>
> Not really, because the 32 bit hardware was more widespread when
> Windows 95 came out. At the time, all software written since 1992 was
> 32 bit-compatible, in fact, I cannot think of any major applications
> that wouldn't run on 32 bit. Contrast that to the delay in getting 64
> applications _years_ after 64 bit hardware has been available.
That's quite PC-centric.
The VAX was 32 bit, for instance. IIRC in the 80-s and early 90-s one
atvantage the GNU tools had was that they could start from a clean 32bit
codebase compared to the legacy UNIX code.
Alpha was available in the early 90-s.
--
Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir@jabber.org | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
tzafrir@cohens.org.il | | best
ICQ# 16849754 | | friend
Reply to: