Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rob Young who wrote (84581)	6/28/1999 6:56:00 PM
From: Robert Salasidis	Respond to of 186894

Just a guess, but I think he shift from 32->64 bit will be much quicker than the 16->32 bit transition was. I would expect NT type of apps (database engines and other software that can immediately use the large address space advantage) will be available with the introduction of the OS. games and other mainstream applications will be much slower in coming, and my guess is we won't see any in number before 2002-3 timeframe. If that does occur however it is still much beter than the 10+ years it took to get 32 bit apps from the introduction of the 386.

To: Rob Young who wrote (84581)	6/28/1999 7:54:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Rob, the whole picture is much more complicated than the one-sided portrait that you paint for Alpha. In this post, I'll cover only the issue of software migration from IA-32 to IA-64. Hope you'll forgive me for dodging the other issues because discussing them could take up several more paragraphs. The big problem with the migration to IA-64 is inertia. Without the hardware IA-32 translation, moving from IA-32 to IA-64 is no easier than moving, say, from IA-32 to Alpha. And Alpha already has the lead in this case. But because Merced throws in IA-32 compatibility, the transition will be a lot easier because no one will have to throw away the existing software base that is out there. But why should IA-32 compatibility matter, if performance isn't going to be too hot? After all, if all you want to run is IA-32 programs, what's the point of buying Merced if we already have a well-established Xeon platform? Well, the hope is that the critical apps like database management, web servers, engineering CAD tools, and other CPU-crunching programs will be the first to make the transition to IA-64. They're the real programs that we all care about when it comes to Spec benchmark scores. The other apps that aren't performance-critical like e-mail servers, Samba, network card drivers, etc., won't need to be ported to IA-64 immediately. (Actually, I don't know about the drivers, but I'm sure you get the point.) Same thing goes with desktop applications like Microsoft Office, Netscape, and games. In other words, the bulk of the effort is concentrated on porting the real heavy-duty apps from IA-32 to IA-64. The rest can wait, particularly since IA-32 isn't going to die off any time soon. How well will this transition work? Hard to say, since supporting both IA-32 and IA-64 is dependent on the OS. We all know just how SUPERB a job Microsoft does with their operating systems. At least there'll be other OS's like Solaris, Linux, and SCO. And how well will IA-32 compatibility be accepted in the market? That's also hard to tell, but supposedly the Tier 1 guys like Dell, NEC, and even Compaq like the idea. Any questions? Tenchusatsu