Tench,
Funny you should mention that, because it wasn't until Windows 95 when 32-bit applications started becoming popular. And when was the 386 introduced? 1988?
You are just proving my point. 386, 486 and even Pentium were successful even without a serious software support. (I don't count DOS extenders, and Win3.x). All this happened when there actually was a need for 32 bit software. There is much less of the need for 64 bit software now compared to need for 32 bit software back in 1988 - 1995
How will it happen "fairly quickly"? "Build it and they will come" won't work fast enough. What is AMD doing to build a critical base of x86-64 apps?
Forget x86-64. Hammer family will be the best 32 bit processors. They will be based on a new core that will take the best of the K7 core and fix things that the first team didn't have time to fix, plug some holes, add some tweaks, add what's needed. On top of it, they will throw in x86-64.
How is AMD going to avoid repeating the failure of 3DNow?
Athlon is a success. It happens to have 3DNow, which is a failure. Pentium MMX was a success, even though MMX is a failure. Piii is a success, even though SSE is a failure.
Hammer will be a success regardless of x86-64. It will start from an established based of 90% plus x86 processors out there. Itanium is starting from zero. What do you think is more challenging, starting from zero % market share with an incompatible processor or starting from the top of the 90% plus mainstream market with a compatible processor?
Joe |
