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: Tony Viola who wrote (99549)	2/20/2000 10:33:00 AM
From: rudedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Tony - re: Add to this the likelihood that the first version of 64-bit Windows is likely to be a composite of 32-bit and 64-bit code "The Register" has always been confused about the development of the 64 bit code-line. I attended a developers' session not too long ago where Brian Valentine laid out the roadmap, and without going into the NDA details, the 32 bit and 64 bit codelines are not separate... there is a "core" of 64 bit specific code for deep OS functions which need to know which hardware they are running on but the bulk of the code is agnostic. While there are some areas of the OS which need to be specifically written for a 64 bit platform, most of the code (maybe 80%) just does not care. Support routines, error handling routines, etc. need to handle 64 bit pointers and registers correctly, but they can do that in current IA32 architecture. Note that the code will ALL run natively on IA64. There is no source code difference for most of the OS, and there is no reason that there should be. The "register" notion that this somehow makes the design a "hybrid" is backwards - what this approach does is assure that there are a minimum number of possible incompatibilities between IA32 and IA64 versions of the code, reduces the test matrix, and cuts down the development effort by a factor of 5, while preserving all of the benefits of true 64 bit capability for those OS and application features which can take advantage of it. The "register" may cast this as MSFT FUD, but having looked at the architecture I see it not as a compromise but as a very clean way to assure that MSFT's 64 bit products will minimize development and test efforts for the ISV and development community while reducing time to market. I don't see any reason why MSFT would allow those codelines to diverge. Isn't it a lot better to have a design where the only porting issue is to click on the "IA-64" box at compile time, and then test just the 64 bit specific features?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (99549)	2/20/2000 10:51:00 AM
From: Frank Ellis Morris	Respond to of 186894

~~~~OTOT~~~ Allen Greenspan is a loose Cannon!!! causing havoc in Financial markets!! Let me make my views on Allen Greenspan perfectly clear. He may have been credited for being the architect of a long time economic expansion but for quite some time now he has been suffering from some sort of brain damage. What right does he have to parade his power and manipulate the free markets? What right does he have to tell us that equities should not grow anymore than 5 to 5% annually? He is saying that stocks should not grow faster than wage increases. Give us a break. This is arrogant, contemptible and criminal. We got to stop this business of intervention and manipulation by people who like to abuse their power. I say stop the media frenzy with Allen Greenspan and repeal any forum which gives the Fed license to cause havoc in the financial markets. Mr Greenspan is a lousy stock picker, his portfolio of bonds is the only thing he is interested in manipulating. The only thing irrational about the stock market is Allen greenspan as he nothing more than a loose cannon. I would caution all to be very careful about using margin as the market can really make us all humble quite fast. Frank