Slashdot Mirror
Windows Reaches 64-Bits, For OEMs
thatrez writes: "Microsoft 's Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition, is now
available for computers based on Intel's 64-bit Itanium chip. The
Itanium chip supports greater amounts of system memory and offers
stronger floating-point, or mathematical, capabilities than current
32-bit desktop processors. The extra memory support and the
floating-point capabilities increase the performance of Web hosting,
data warehousing and other applications." Now available in this case means that certain OEMs will soon be selling systems loaded with 64-bit Advanced Server, and later other manufacturers will join in. 64-bit versions of XP are expected sometime next year as well.
I'll run it on my nonexistant IA64 machine!
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
just about 6 mos (?) after the 64-bit linux stuff was announced. It's incredible how much progress you can make with billions of $$s backing you up.
"Advanced Server for Advanced Dummies"
I can't wait.
-... ---
what about XP? whos gonna run it? I have the gold release version (work for a university) and its horribly kludgy....gotta have to go with one of the *nixs for the new 64 bit intel chips...
Welcome to my land of make believe.
Will this work with AMD's upcoming SledgeHammer??
What kind of functionality limitations will be placed on these machines (its ms... there's always limitations...)??
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I hope that that it isn't, well maybe I do ;) (Just to see it crash and burn) that is like Windows 95, that is to say, just 32bit code hacked to run on a 64bit processor. Anyone remember Windows 95, just 16bit dos with a 32bit menu?
Winter 2010: With Glowing Hearts
I'm sure the pr0n sites will find a way to use more floaating-point capabilities and less size constraints. They're so inventive.
Next thing you know, they'll take the money out of your bank account for you, without you even having to ask, and then personally deliver the porn to your door.
using namespace slashdot;
troll::post();
Yea it'll work on the 64 bit chips, by reducing their functionality to that of a 32-bit chip. Much like how it now utilizes a 32-bit chip at the level of a 16-bit chip.
Here's a another helpful link related to this release
"The ones who dont do anything are always the ones who try to pull you down" -- Henry Rollins
dyanamic pages. intranets. online collaboration. The things we take for granted in the "off-line" world. This allows for more experimentation with integration.
________________________________________________
"Limited Edition"? Is this self-imposed regulation?
Then the neighbors could see it !!
Please, just leave it in my 10G inbasket.
tia
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
Microsoft was waiting on the Itanium. They *JUST* became available in quantity. Until they are available in quantity no vendor ships servers with them. Microsoft has been holding back on their release until then.
C:\ONGRTLNS.W95
Similarly, perhaps a coalition of vendors -- Sun, IBM, Compaq, Apple and the gurus of the 64-bit Linux kernel ports -- should run a congratulatory ad for this momentous event: Microsoft finally goes 64-bit.
Sorry, maybe I'm missing something here but how does increased floating point performance equate to significantly better web serving? (either of static content or dynamic) I'm very skeptical but I'm also curious to see if there is an aspect to this I've previously missed. The increased memory addressability otoh makes perfect sense, apache sure can be a hungry beast when you lard those chillen' (yeah, I'm from the southern US ;) ) up with mod_perl et al...
News for Geeks in Austin, TX
Wonder what they mean by "Limited Edition"?
M$ is only going to sell a limited number of copies, or it's 'limited' in features?
W9x:Thanks for the make-work project Bill.
This release will not work on AMD SledgeHammer. This one is particularly for the IA64 instruction set, not IA32 or x86-64. The standard Windows 2000 and Windows XP will work just fine on SledgeHammer, if you want to waste all that AMD goodness on a 32-bit Microsoft OS.
Microsoft is also considering an x86-64 port of Windows XP, but they have not announced their decision yet.
Even Slashdot wants to hide some things
Microsoft 's Windows Advanced Server, Limited Edition
Nomen est omen
ObLinuxComment: Let's make Linux 128-bit clean, just for the hell of it, so it's ready for when someone makes a 128-bit processor to run it on.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
btw, in regards to 64bit windows - will it crash faster now?
________________________________________________
"Windows is a 32-bit patch to a 16-bit GUI for an 8-bit operating system written for a 4-bit processor by a 2-bit company that can't stand 1-bit of competition"
Guess now we have to think of something for a 64-bit part. And relax... it's just a joke. Laugh a little.
I posted to
Aren't current desktop computers already majorly overpowered? What do average desktop users need 64 bits of unbelievable number crunching power for?
Seriously, nobody I know uses their computer to host web sites with massive traffic, or simulate nuclear reactions in real time. My friend just got a new 1.4GHz with 512 megabytes of RAM machine for university. Shocked, I asked him, why the hell did he get that much? Because he could, he said. Come on - 1.4GHZ with 512 megs for word processing?
Thirty-two bits have sufficed for everything I ever wanted to do with a computer, and as well for practically everyone I know. Who honestly needs 64 bits, and even more speed???
Now CodeRed can scan IP's addys for unpatched IIS machines to infect in half the time.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
All you would get for your trouble is a crippling licence fee (courtesy of MS), a dearth of 64-bit applications & drivers, slower 32-bit execution and double the memory and disk requirements. These are hardly compelling reasons to "upgrade".
This is great! Maybe now people will quit bitching about /. not posting any Windows stories and find something else to complain about :)
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
But golly, the Itanium isn't even GHz-class while the Pentium 4 is 2GHz. Why would anyone buy such an obviously slow machine? Even a pokey 1.4GHz Athlon is faster than the Itanium, right? Quake 3 framerates must really suck!
(Amusing how Intel went with a short pipeline at the expense of clockspeed when selling to a more technologically literate market...)
If a quality operating system (which are abundant for IA32) could have been produced for IA64 before Windows was, it would have made a huge dent in the Windows IA64 market share.
Developers eager to develop IA64 applications would use the first operating system available. Initially, there would be more software available for the first operating system out the gate. And people would recognize the first operating system as "the" native operating system. The implications are obvious.
Also, I have a feeling Intel will focus IA64 for on servers and stuff like that. I don't think the average person will be using this on their home for a long time. Which would be another mistake because it would lower the chances of widespread adoption. If that happens, let's hope we're using 64-bit processors in our homes by 2020. :)
Honestly, I am still way way more interested in Alpha. (The "server focus" mistake is ongoing.) I hope they are able to continue supporting it.
Yeah, but it's only really been 64-bit since Solaris 7, which was 1998 I think. All the v9 (64-bit) stuff happened then, and even then, you couldn't run it properly on early Ultra 1s.
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I'm not trying to be too "flamebait" here, but what performance improvements does 64-bit provide, in actuality? Not just in Windows, but in any operating system? From a speed standpoint, 32-bit wasn't much of an improvement over 16 (stability, of course, got better with more protected memory). But since 32-bit can handle such a large protected memory space already...
(extra memory support, floating-point capabilities) increase the performance of (Web hosting, data warehousing and other applications)
Don't you ?
Wow, I have to get it quick - will it come with an extra disc with commentary and "making of" features?
Does anyone know if it comes in a metal lunchbox, or tin case?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Bull. The way M$Marketing works is that if they had had a 64-bit Itanium prototype they would have gleefully flaunted that months ago. Compared to IBM and Sun products, both Microsoft _and_ Linux still have a long way to go before they can live up to the demands of an enterprise server environment, especially when it comes to high availability and scalability both have a rocky road ahead of them. Whether Itanium based servers cut it there, also remains to be seen btw.
I wonder if Windows 2000 Advanced Server Limited Edition is about as much 64 bit as Windows 95 is 32 bit.
.NET thing so popular that Windows will make it all the way to world domination?
Undoubtedly parts of this version of Windows 2000 has to remain 32 bit for compatibility. Or is Microsoft going to port Microsoft Office to 64 bit Windows as well? Unless Microsoft has implemented some type of FX!32 (DECs 32 -> 64 bit layer which "learns" and accellerates), this release of Windows may potentially be quite useless. One of the reasons people use Windows is the availability of applications.
I can't for the life of me think that this is anything different from a marketing release where Microsoft can say "We're in the future, we're 64 bit". But it's nevertheless interesting that Microsoft has gotten something out the door that is 64 bit. Let's see how well Microsoft entrenches itself in the datacenters. My guess is that the 64 bit x86 (Intel or AMD) will become far cheaper than the Sun counterparts and thus taking over a lot, but not everything. But will Windows be the preferred platform or is Linux going to hit Microsoft where it hurts? Or perhaps Microsoft will make this
In either case, from a technical standpoint I will observe how Windows 64 bit is going. Very interesting indeed.
Alex
Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
Dude, now that was a sweet trick!!!
NT drove the Alpha in 32-bit mode. That doesn't count.
Let's look at the numbers. Last month on MSN.support.com, there were 453,234,234 bug reports. During the same time period, there were zero bug reports for Linux on the same forum. It's obvious to anyone that can do simple troll-matic that Windows is dying.
And it did it by treating the Alpha as a 32-bit
CPU. Hardly a stunning achievement.
That microsoft controls >90% of the market for operating systems? Could it be that they want to have a leg up on AMD? Gee, why would they do that?
:)
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
The new versions of 64-bit XP are getting useeful again. The first rev's of 64bit XP, were really alpha quality stuff. However, in typical MS Fashion, each revision just gets better and better. Still, I think the need for this product is overstated. Why is that?
Itanium is aimed squarely at the hideously overpriced Sun e450 and up lines of hardware. If you are Intel, you're not going to get hardcore Solaris shops moving to Windows Adv Server, and Windows DataCenter. This brings us to....
Linux. For the record, I found TurboLinux was the company to produce a usable OS for Itanium, followed by Suse, and then Redhat, this has resulted in:
Resources. At this point. Redhat's Distro seems to be the best on Itanium, giving them a leg up on the Real Prize, McKinley. However, porting apps to the Itanium hasn't been as easy as just treating it as yet another 64bit CPU.
Less Talk, More Beer.
(killer NG = microsoft.public.windowsxp.beta.help-and-support - you guys ROCK!)
Win XP is not perfect, and not for everybody, but outpaces anything M$FT or its competitors have come up with to date. Throw 64-bit support into the mix - assuming it works ;) and you've got a real class-act. Do yourself a favor and at least give it a try and see if you don't like it, too.
"limited edition" in Marketing Speak mean "fewer features" not "collector's item" -- though we may hope it becomes one. Think of an LE version of a car. Think Photoshop LE.
originally did.
SGI was the first "mainstream" vendor to go
with a 64-bit OS (and it still has 32-bit-mode
and 64-bit-mode executables. DEC was next with
OSF/1 (later renamed Digital UNIX), and eventually VMS. IBM and Sun came later -- about the same
time as Linux (for Alpha and then for MIPS).
IMNHO, there was a very good reason Intel made
such an investment into the IA-64 port of Linux:
so that they could be sure there would be an OS
for it by the time it came on the market!
MS is a latecomer for that (currently have Linux
and two other UNIX ports that I know of with 64-bit support for IA-64).
"My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
Itanium to x86 backwards compatibility is handled mostly in hardware, so you can credit Intel more than Microsoft for that.
Apple's support for 68K application under POWER must have been done in software, because POWER has no 68K emulation mode. (Although POWER and its predecessors have a long history of software emulation tools. In addition to the 68K, there are at least two POWER-based x86 emulators, and a POWER predecessor had a S/370 emulator.)
Yes ! now the bugs will be 3d and rendered in real time !
duh
Finally story about Microsoft is not accompanied by Gates/Borg icon.
I'm not an expert, but I was under the impression that the Power Mac G4 processors were 128-bit...
http://www.apple.com/powermac/processor.html
Will this work on the as yet unannouced 'enhanced' version of Itanium, McKinley? And what is Intel planning on calling McKinley?
Hell yes! Microsoft may have an army of mercenary programmers, but that's only in the States.
The Open Source community is world-wide and outnumbers the microserfs by several orders of magnitude both in quantity and quality. Not to mention the morale. There's a whole world of a difference between a paid, "I'm doing it only for the big bucks" programmer and a dedicated Open Source warrior.
64 Bit WIndows:
Stability Not Included
microsoft wanted to be sure everyone could see this:
h tml
http://homepage.mac.com/jcarusone/iMovieTheater2.
_f
Maybe slightly Off-Topic BUT...
I was surprised to not see a "Cyborg Bill" icon next to this M$ story. Just a thought.
------
Random, useless fact: I type in startx entirely with my left hand.
we could crash Windows with only 16 bits. None of this namby-pamby 64 bit stuff. No sir. We used to say, "look at me, I'm crashing with a segmented memory model!" And you know what? It was good enough for us and we liked it.
This new generation doesn't know how to crash Windows. No sir. They say, "oh, I couldn't possibly crash Windows without 64 bits, oh no." Wimps. All of 'em. Think bus bits grow on trees or something.
A man without a God is like a fish without a bicycle.
Right now 64bit computing is simply for high end workstations and servers.
Databases, for those of you who don't know are extreme memory hogs and 64 bit memory space is necessary for most large systems. NT or Linux this is a nice feature.
Video editing/rendering - having this much memory is nice + floating point = fast!
I know exxon will love them, geophysics isn't easy on 32 bit systems when utilizing holographic imagery and trying to produce maps of oil.
Microsoft just has an easy interface for how things work. 64 bit in some form or fashion has been aroiund for a while in solaris, again mainly for a server os. Irix has had it, and again they're for the graphics/producing bit.
SO NT will just fill it's niche.
I have no idea what good linux on itanium is. can only get mysql to go so quick, pgsql doesn't support 64 bit as far as i know and not much for high end graphics. May be good for a rendering farm i guess?
Atleast with SGI & NT/XP/2k you got lots of visualization, data manipulation, mapping and extrapolation type applications. Sun has its share.
So i don't know why people dis it. You aren't going to run Office on the sucker and if you do who cares if its on par with a PIII, a PIII is still fast emulated or not.
Its just nice to know 64 bits is around the corner. With memory and CPU prices falling through the roof its only a matter of time before consumers (gamers / coders and tech heads) upgrade to 64 bit systems.
Be it linux, solaris, irix or not.
Cool trick. Uh. I think. I opened it with mozilla. I saw html. wtf? Just so i don't get modded down, i'll throw in my .02. Where is linux the kernel on this 64-bit bandwagon? Are we going to support it?
We dance to all the wrong songs.
--Refused.
If it does FP in software, how the hell does an 800MHz Itanium achieve 711 SpecFP? Yes, some operations have to be broken down into simpler ones, but you're implying they're all emulated using integer operations... Bullshit!
They don't. The problem for Intel is that Itanium's performance on everything except floating-point intensive applications is TERRIBLE. Itanium's SpecInt number is well below 400 in any configuration, which is slower than any other PC-class CPU available today. Itanium is much better on SpecFP, although it remains to be seen how good it is on REAL floating point applications.
Itanium, and in fact the entire IA64 architecture, is a disaster. They bet the company on the wrong technology*. Intel will probably survive just because their marketing machine will persuade clueless corporate buyers to take the chip.
* The numbers don't lie: for most applications, all the explicit parallelism, speculative operations, compiler engineering and transistor count in the world can't compensate for not having a real speculating, out-of-order core.
btw, it seems they are reconsidering their decision to close it down...
karma capped
Great, now we will have 64 bit bugs on 64 bit chip runnning 64 bit os.
But what I'm interested to konw is whether color of BSOD change ?
It's a server. A big server. And hosting customers will DEMAND we move them from a large number of SMP boxes to one giant 64 bit server. Collapse a bunch of boxes down. OK so far so good. Reduce labor costs by reducing the number of servers though most of our metrics are based on the ratio of end users or accounts to boxes not the number of boxes. So lets say that Siebel rewrites their application for 64 bits and we run it. Let's say customer X now runs one giant instance of a DB on it or one GIANT authentication server/LDAP machine. All I've got to say is
Holy single fucking point of failure Batman!
An Intel box as big as a huge ass Sun or a RS/6k-S80 will cost at least as much to support and twice as much to harden for security.
Not a critcism just a fact - we'll have to reshape all of our SLAs to reflect the unreliability inherent with consolidation.
I'm suprised no one has mentioned NT running on MIPS R4000 and R4400 cpus. Those are definately 64 bit. Although those boxes can't run IRIX because of the firmware.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
the Linux kernel already runs on IA64. In the article it mentions that several distributions have been ported to the Itanium processor already.
If you look on Redhat's FTP sites, you can see the IA64 subdirectories right next to the i386 ones.
If this is true, why did Digital have FX!32 for 32 bit software that made new DLL's optimised for the 64 bit chips? Besides, there was always the Alpha version for patches and other stuff from MS with NT 4.0. Try installing any software for NT on an Alpha box running NT 4.0 without having FX!32 on it. It won't let you typically, and if is does, it won't work. The only way I could see what roca said to be true is if MS made the O/S 32 bit and compiled it for a 64 bit environment the way Linux is done for the Alpha, (compile code with last 32 bits unused to eliminate recoding everything,) but then why is the Alpha software ususaly wup 32 bit versions? My only guess would be, O/S is 64 bit on 64 bit CPU and program is 64 bit as well. Seems silly to bottelneck the entire system with the O/S, makes sence to let the hardware be the limiting factor. New hardware = better performance, go figgure...
Who wants Pork Chops?
I think they should change the BSOD to Purple. So it would be PSOD.
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
That's gonna ROCK when 64Bits hits mainstream (i.e. WindowsXP workstation 64bits maybe?) with dual/quad/octal slege/claw-hammer (or whatever that 64bits chip is names) ;)
:)
Future looks cool. As long as it's not too far
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
Easy. Windows Advanced XP Server is a 64 bit compilation of a 32 bit patch to a 16 bit GUI running on an 8 bit operating system designed for a 4 bit processor created by a 2 bit company who cannot stand 1 bit of competition. Although I will point out that the NT and XP lines were 32bit from the getgo. Windows 9x on the other hand, yes, it's a 32 bit layer over a 16 bit kernal. Except for ME, which does away with the dos bootstrap.
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
If 64-bit computing was so important, people would have bought Alpha processors. Introduced back in the early-1990s, the Alpha was largely ignored (outside of the high-end niche market).
Digital had VMS and Unix for Alpha; M$ had NT. Evidently, the high-end customers discovered that Unix was the best OS for running databases and CPU-intensive apps on a 64-bit platform. Alpha/NT is history and VMS is probably next.
Aside from cannibalizing the revenue stream from DEC VAX processors, the Alpha was not all that successful. Compaq bought Digital, then handed over Alpha to Intel.
M$ has to release a 64-bit OS, just to avoid being identified as obsolescent technology. I predict that it will be quite a while before desktop users actually need 64-bit CPUs, although it would be useful on servers almost immediately. M$ will hold on to the 32-bit desktops, but they will lose the 64-bit server market because they lost it already. When the desktops truly need 64-bit power, the OS will not be M$. If you think M$ licensing is obnoxious now, just wait until they sense a captive 32-bit market that is ready to migrate to 64-bit. M$ will over-estimate the market value of their 64-bit software, and the customers will be screaming for alternatives.
The Digital and M$ 64-bit concept of the 1990s is not all that different from the Intel and M$ concept of 2002. Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it.
4 gigabytes should be enough for anybody.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The extra memory support and the floating-point capabilities increase the performance of Web hosting
My what a big web server you have!
The greater to request default.ida with, my dear.
Oh, imagine a beowoulf cluster of these! Lot's of error logs!
This quote from everyone's mate Bob says it all.
Alpha running in 32-bit mode is NOT the same as x86. FX32 translated x86 binaries into 32-bit Alpha binaries.
you can now crash in record time! That's a plus, right?
Cheers.
This is definately newsworth to see a version of Windows ported to a 64 bit implementation. Nothing is as trivial as just porting the core/kernel. Just ask Sun how well Solaris 2.6 went.
:-)
This leads to a couple of side question: How are the Linux and BSD IA-64 ports doing? I heard something about both of them awhile back. Both camps reported stuff is going well with kernels and compilers running but then the news just died away. Anything new an interesting to report? I would be interested in how much bloat going to a pure 64 bit kernel actually is.
Didn't Intel claim that the Pentium is a 64 bit processor? Where are the 64 bit ports? *shock* Does this mean that Intel wasn't exactly truthful?
I admit the disparity between the integer (mediocre at best) and fp (top of the line) spec scores is disturbing. I am curious what you mean by REAL floating point operations?
To me it seems like the much quoted photoshop and 3d rendering applications should be the strength of this cpu. "Real" for me is brute force multiplies on very large matrices of no particular structure
with a good dose of control (if-then) loops in between.
I would have assumed the new spec floating point to be more indicative of these types of operations than say quake 3. So mind saying a bit more and also further clarify your footnote?
That's hilarious, a Limited Edition of a piece of software that can be copied over and over and over for almost no cost at all.
I thought limited edition was usually reserved for things where there was an actual scarcity of, such as cars and such.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
They wern't 64bit clean on the alpha, from what I understand they wern't '64-bit' at all. Sort of like win32s on windows 3.1.
the first service pack for it was released today, along with a security patch for that service pack.
Intel is like Apple in the 80's. Back then Apple was releasing new computers all time trying to replace the Apple ][. The only problem is all their profit was in the Apple ][ sector. Every time they got screwed with the mac they just released new Apple ][ hardware. Eventually it worked but by then apple had lost the PC market and a lot of their customers to the IBM clone storm. Intel is trying to repeat history, they keep comming up with new processors to replace the x86 first there was the i432 (was that the number?) then there was the i860/i960 and now the itanic. Their latest effort is probably doomed because of AMD's hammer line. Intel will have to release a P4 that runs so well that it puts AMD out of the running or they will have to release a 64-bit x86 processor to compete in the 'server' space with AMD.
Linux has been on alpha and sparc for years. MS is playing megga retard catch up. Their OS is kind of like the Brady House Design.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
SpecFP benchmarks are relatively small programs, and it's not clear whether compilation techniques used on such programs scale up to larger applications. On the other hand, you are right that the Itanium will probably perform very well on small regular FP kernels like one finds in Photoshop. I would worry, however, about applications that have irregular control flow and/or irregular memory access patterns. Some 3D rendering tasks fall into this category.
The thing is that problems of the form "multiply matrices fast" are fairly easy to make fast. Vector units, reconfigurable units (including CPU-attached FPGAs and Stanford Imagine-style coprocessors), multiple CPU cores, lots of FP units, IRAM --- they all kick butt on these problems. Even with traditional designs, you'll notice that Athlon and Pentium 4 performance on these kinds of codes has been improving rapidly. Itanium's lead in these tasks can't be considered secure. And Amdahl's law suggests that terrible integer performance (very hard to fix having given up out-of-order execution) will strangle them even for FP-intensive applications, sooner or later.
According to an article on the Register, the WinXP SDK has a plugin for support of X86-64 processors.
So not exactly ==Official MS Support, more like MS covering their bases in case the Hammer really takes off.
Wu-Tang Name: Half-Cut Skeleton Get your own Wu-Na
I really like reading Slashdot, and I also learn a lot by reading (ie. the latest Mozilla version numbers and how to ignore ACs :). But every time Windows or Microsoft appears on the headlines, unheard of amounts of FUD comments get posted.
I happen to be somewhat informed on the subject, so I'll let you know that:
- Windows Limited Edition Server is called thus because it's a very temporary edition, some sort of a door to Windows.NET server (32 and 64-bit), which will appear sometime next year. Windows LE Server is mostly just a rushed-up 64-bit Win2000, to be bundled with Itaniums.
- Windows NT 4.0 on the Alpha was NOT 64-bit.
- Windows XP 64-bit betas have been kicking around since Windows XP Beta 1.
- The Linux community (including me, a Linux apprentice), must find something else to says about Windows than 'It crashes all the friggin time' and stuff. Have you used Windows XP? I'm using it right now. If it'll ever crash (it hasn't until now), it will be in the same way Linux crashes : due to driver problems and stuff like that.It also runs great on my p250, and if you like your OS clean, you can remove the controversial features (Windows Messenger, EVEN IE 6). But we'll think of something, surely.
There is no such thing as 'world peace'.
So emulation slows down applications? Do applications compiled for Linux x86 even run on the IA64 version of Linux? Personally I though the whole backward compatibility thing was a good idea (within reason).
Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means
Just wait until 64 bit Windows come out... We'll have to deal with hundreds of ******64.dll files too.
Oh yeah, I probably don't need to point out that Intel is not marketing this chip as a Photoshop/games engine, which it might be good for. They're marketing it as a server chip, something it's spectacularly unsuited for.
OK, it is 64-bit which is slightly useful for some servers. But by the time 64-bit becomes really useful for many people, AMD will have Hammer/x86-64. That is a much better processor design, 64-bit, easy to port to (just a 64-bit stretch of x86 with a few sensible goodies like more registers), and for extra points will run x86 code incredibly fast! The last point ensures it will ship in volume and hence massively undercut any other 64-bit chip on price.
Linux has been at 64-Bits for everybody ;-)
All these same things were said about the Pentium when it came out. All are also unimportant in a server.
So, will we now have the two blue screens of death as they make room for dumping double the size variables?
What happens when the two blue screens of death toggling mechanism breaks? Will we get the magenta screen of tormented afterlife?
Windows NT for Alpha was never 64 bit. Ever. It was 32 bit which was loaded through a special boot loader (ARC). Without the ARC boot loader there was no way one could boot NT. Later on came AlphaBIOS with the cheaper OEM boards. Same thing though, only a true 64 bit operating system could load through the SRM.
Alex
Wealth is the product of man's capacity to think. -Ayn Rand
Great! Doesn't this make everyone happy? Now Windows can compete with linux in the 64 bit arena. It's good to see Microsoft shattering an 'evil' monopoly in this market and creating healthy competition. *duck*
No, NT ran on Alpha's in 32-bit mode. FX32 was used to translate x86 code to Alpha code... That's all. Just because a two chips are 32 bit chips doesn't mean they're compatible. FX32 provided that bridge, but that's all.
All these same [heat and form factor issues] were said about the Pentium when it came out. All are also unimportant in a server.
When you colocate a rack of web servers, not only do you pay for the Internet connection, but you also pay rent for the square feet your gear occupies on the datacenter floor. The Itanium processor dissipates more heat than its competitors, requiring a large form factor to house fans. A large form factor for a given performance level doubles the rent, as you are now using two server racks instead of one.
Will I retire or break 10K?
so will there be:
2*.dll
2*reboot
2*hot fix
2*service packs
2*the bloat
2*the suck
?
This
"Making of" meaning source code? Heh heh... :)
The coolest voice ever.
KILL M$. Limit them to the x86. Amd then just wait.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Nope, Microsoft developed a fully 64bit version of Windows NT to run on Alpha, but it was canned before being released.
They actually demonstrated it running a 64bit port of MS SQL Server at one of their 'scalability days' where it blew the x86 intel boxes away. I think the advantage was mostly that the machine had an enormous amount of addressable RAM and the 64 WinNT running on Alpha could actually take full advantage of this as disk cache.
Of course, this was back in the days when the Alpha was the fastest general purpose CPU on the planet, before DEC and then the Q let axp fall behind and MS dropped NT. At the time rumour had it that MS kept the alpha port and the 64 bit alpha port alive internally in preparation for "Merced"
*sigh*
First amiga bought it, then Alpha/NT, then Be - I just can't seem to jump onto a winning bandwagon. I hope I'm not jinxing FreeBSD by using it on all my machines...
SGI stock quote (August 30, 2001): 47 cents . Are you buying? Perhaps you will make enough money in the stock market to buy an Itanium 3D PDA, with a 64-bit version of WinCE!
...would be if they'd deliver some of the women of pr0n to your door.
THAT's what I'd call cervix... I mean, service!
My MCSE is what got me into the IT field as a pc helpdesk support tech. . Sure they wont teach you everything but I did learn the basics on what a network packet is and the 7 layers of the OSI model. I also use Linux as my main OS and know some c++/java programming so I am not a total mcse idiot but the certs are for getting your first IT job. They are not a replacement for experience or knowledge of course but they serve their purpose. They are also very common for system administrators or support professionals who are trained in other operating systems. If you have 3 years experience as a Jr. Novell Netware LAN admin and are applying for a NT admin job, then a MCSE certification can show an employer that you can use NT but you also have experience system administering as well. This can be very important in certain situations where you need to prove that you can work in a multi os environment.
:-)
What I hate are those cheap so-called "MCSE boot camp" and other computer-training ads in the local newspapers. They promise you 70k a year in a sort of get rich quick scheme. Many of the applicants are suckers who are mainly poor immigrants who currently work at low wage jobs. At least where I am in New York City. They apply for these 6 week programs which only teach you how to answer questions on the mcse exams. No actual administration or support training is provided. Then afterwards they pass and expect to make 60K a year. A few of them actually made it into the IT world because they had a college degree as well. Its these mcse's are the ones who truly know nothing. Most of them who know dick still work at their low wage jobs and their mcse's did not help.
However I went to a professional business institute (paid by my employer of course) and was a pc junkie since middle school and knew my stuff. I learned most of my computer knowledge from experience but I thank my mcse training school for giving me a foot in the door. A mcse might not make a great admin or programmer but would probably be an ideal candidate for an entry level help desk job.
http://saveie6.com/
Only 1 thing matters.
64bit Solitaire.
Somebody out there please give me a basic lesson in computer science.
Does a 64 bit processor running at 2 Ghz do more computations per second than a 32 bit processor running at the same speed? Does this hold true for Intel processors?
Another thing, what about the Sun systems? Since they've released 64 bit processors a while ago, what's stopping them from making 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16384, 32768, 65536, 131072, 262144, 524288, 1048576, 2097152, 4194304, 8388608, 16777216 bit processors?
Please forgive me if I sound like an ignorant.
Yuioup
(extra memory support AND floating-point capabilities) increase the performance of (Web hosting AND data warehousing AND other applications)
The above poster simply pointed out that this is bull for the floating point part. And in fact it is bull for the memory part as well, unless you actually have more than 4GB RAM installed. 32-bits are perfectly fine to access all of your 256MB RAM. (Or am I missing something here?)
bla
Actually I come from the mainframe world, the AS/400 where 6 minutes of unplanned downtime a year are the exception. Lots of hardware is highly reliable and better yet coming down the pike with improved self monitoring.
It's the software that's a problem. A kernel panic on one of 12 NT servers is less of a problem than a kernel panic on 1 of 1 NT servers. A problematic security hole caused by yet another ubiquitous IIS or Active Server glitch is more of a problem from a change control perspective if all your users are on box. A big box that still uses NetBIOS over TCP and blasts a ton a crud thorough port 139 is probably easier to manage from a firewall perspective if what you want is to filter traffic from-to by address but attempting to mount a network IDS on the box will present correlation engine problems in the shear volume of false positives that an NT based solution will generate.
And so on.