Intel shifts 64-bit emphasis

[Ray Austin]

uh~oh!

Sounds like paper now.... time will tell.

LINK

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Intel using AMD64 shame on them!!!!!

[Ray Austin]

Yeah, one minute Intel says the world isn't ready for 64bit on the desktop and now they say when the software's there, they will be there too? Sheesh!

I think they are trying to stir things up a tad. But no concrete evidence that intel is that ready for 64bit. Probably are but no-one except Intel knows for sure.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

well, i feel AMD finally getting it right. Microsoft is supporting them with XP 64, that's very important. I think the only problem left for AMD64 is people actually buying the 64bit chip. Unlike years ago when AMD was trying to promote their own instructions, this time they may get it because they have a strong customer base unlike years ago. And that is the gamer/enthusiasts market. They got this market because their Athlon chips are faster and cheaper. If the industry is going to start adopting the standard, it will start there, which also means the Linux and Win-XP-as-a-gaming-platform. They are definitely on the right track IMO (with the UT2003 AMD port), and the hardest part is to move this trend to the main-stream market. That means giving the average joe the idea "AMD is just as good/better as Intel". (no offend intended to Intel employees here)

Something for a change, Intel using AMD technology, I think its good for the overall computing industry!

[Ray Austin]

LOL, yeah it is kinda funny... It's almost as if Intel has stuck their foot in their mouth.

Sometimes the underdog does win.


Any bets on the Super Bowl?

I'm here in SuperBowl Central and it's driving me nuts!

[Jerry Jones]

Cool article.

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5150336.html?tag=nefd_pop

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

[Ray Austin]

HEH, HEH, HEH

This isn't really good for Intel...{TITANIC 'Itanium'... is going down } Nor is it good for AMD.... tougher competition.


BUT, it's very good for us. Thank God for AMD! Without them we would probably never see 64bit for the desktop other than in the form of an apple.

With Intel making the switch, it will put more pressure on software developers and we'll see 64bit software much sooner with two manufacturers on the 64bit bandwagon.

YEAH! We Win!


Can't wait to see the performance tests!

Oh yeah an I bet the Pats win 32 to 29 by kicking a field goal with only a few seconds remaining in the 4th quarter.

[Chrono_Wanderer]

no, AMD won. Because if developers don't support AMD64, AMD can go backrupt. They put a lot of bet onto AMD64.

[Ray Austin]

Well no one is better at the bankruptcy game then AMD. So no need to worry about that.

[Ray Austin]

Here's another spin on the 64bit announcement by Intel.

LINK


hehehe

[Chrono_Wanderer]

Actually, that reminds me... 8085 architecture sucks by itself (probably the worse). Maybe EPIC really is a good approch?

but then, if EPIC is to succeed, Intel will dominate even more, which is a bad thing for customers. (not that EPIC will ever be useful anyways)

[Fluff]

They wouldnt have developed EPIC, if there wasnt a need. I bet intel wanted everyone to have a fresh start with Itanium.

The reason i'm assuming it has been slated is that it has poor 32 bit program speed. (oh and it is expensive).

How many people on the internet actually slate the the Itanium / EPIC architecture with good knowledge, of what it is capable of.
Then again ideal situations dont always exist.

Instead this switch to a 32-64bit processor. Could hinder things, and just move the road block a few miles down the road. Rather than building a new road.