Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Require 64-bit Processors
Nom du Keyboard writes "According to News.com Microsoft has said they will require 64-bit instruction set processors (AMD64/EMT64) for all future processor releases. These include Exchange 12, Longhorn Server R2 and Small-Business Edition Longhorn Server among others. I guess we have to bite this bullet sometime."
They have also said a 32-bit version of the Longhorn server would be available.
i alsID=7046
http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?Editor
That's not how I read it. Microsoft is going to require 64 bit processors for its new software. That's about equivalent to them requiring a 32-bit processor for Windows 95, and thereby excluding everyone on a 286. No reason why these systems shouldn't run legacy 32-bit apps - and maybe even 16-bit apps - but they're going to need a 64-bit processor.
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
"Microsoft is breaking backward compatability? "
I'm assuming you are talking about 32bit? If you are then... Longhorn Server R2 doesn't come out until 2009, the 2007 version will come out with a 32bit counterpart Their 64 bit platform run 32 bit code without degrading performance.
The only thing that has to be re-written is 32-bit drivers. They are only breaking "driver" compatibility for legacy hardware. However hardware makers have started (last summer) to write the 64 bit drivers for their hardware, so I wouldn't worry to much about that.
Is that enough info to debunk?
According to News.com Microsoft has said they will require 64-bit instruction set processors (AMD64/EMT64) for all future processor releases.
I think "all" should be "some" and "processor releases" should be "software releases"... Here's CNET's take on it:
Microsoft said some upcoming products, including its Exchange 12 e-mail server, will run only on 64-bit processors.
It seems to be mostly a focus on 64-bit server products from now on to me, and far from a total switch to 64-bit.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
well, in the original article that the article links to it says:
"Separately, Microsoft also announced that the Compute Cluster Server and several other upcoming server software releases will work only with 64-bit processors."
They're talking specifically about server software, not really desktop.
In the article the post links to it says:
"company executives detailed its plans to add support 64-bit microprocessors in its server applications and operating systems."
so they're supporting 64 bit in their OS, but not requiring it... least none of the stories said they're requiring it.
I agree, I think it's a mistake to require 64 bit support in desktop OS's in the near future, I mean there's 5 year old processors that run the latest XP just fine so to say 5 yrs from now that most processors made today wont run Windows 2010 (twenty-ten ;) seems to be a pretty serious statement.
Are they trying to kill Intel sales?
my karma will be here long after I'm gone
Uh ya, right, GPU is an ATI design and CPU is a 3-core PowerPC by IBM.
Both were created in cooperation with Microsoft and are fully custom made (the Xenon CPU took 2 years), but they're still not "MS processors".
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
Most of you guys have no clue what Microsoft is actually doing. They are going to require some of their *server* products in the future to run on 64 bit processors - not home PCs. A lot of their server products today run on 32-bit and 64-bit processors already. I bet most of their new installs of these server products are already being done on 64 bit processors so they're just going to make things simpler. I doubt anyone will complain.
Not to advocate the devil, but the NT line was never dos based, so that quote no longer applies and that update makes no sense.
Definately. I've got machines slower than that here running on my gigabit lan with no problems. I suspect he either is using all hubs instead of switches and his network is huge, or is completely pwned by a worm and doesn't know it. Even "unreasonable broadcast traffic" from some protocol isn't going to tax a machine that's at least a pentium classic.