Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (110602)	5/12/2000 12:00:00 PM
From: that_crazy_doug	Read Replies (2) of 1574478

<< Win2K is pretty much a port from 32 to 64 bit at this point wrt IA-64. They aren't extending the feature set to my knowledge. I have read most of the hard work is in the compiler, not changing Win2K itself. Source code wise it should be the exact same code base for either the 32 or 64 bit versions. Except when assembler is used - of course. >> The issue about compilers is just as bad as if they had to re-write the os. 1) You get a hack OS. (it was designed for a different platform, so you get lots of features you don't need and are missing features you do, plus reliability is very questionable) 2) The compiler schedule may hold up the OS for a much longer period of time than the OS development would have. 3) The compiler probably won't be perfected for several years, so the OS is likely to contain bugs generated by the compiler for quite awhile. It never seemed to me like windows 2000 on the ia-64 was a great match anyway, hopefully they'll have a good unix/linux port to it which will probably suit the needs of the people who buy them better anyway.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next