On TV.com: Alien-Invasion Lessons Learned From V
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 12 of 57:
Next »
« Previous
Tool
Windows NT 4.0 was available on 2 different 64-bit architectures...
Alpha and MIPS. The Alpha systems could run 32-bit programs using FX!32 (a similar system to WOW64 that XP/2003 have... except the Alpha system was emulated and not a VM).

Support for those branches of NT were cut off during beta 2 of win2k. MIPS went first, then Alpha.

However, MS did have a 64-bit OS in 1996.

Apple has yet to release a 64-bit OS.

Most Linux distributions are still working on their 64-bit released. Red Hat, for example, does not yet have AMD64 support... unless you count Fedora Beta 1. However, since you're complaining about Microsoft's "preview" release, I hope you wouldn't make your argument based on a beta.

So yes, GCC has AMD64 support and so most of Linux can be compiled for AMD64 systems. The Linux kernel and many libraries have been designed to take advantage of that support.
But seriously... 64-bit kernel support *just* came to Linux in 2.6.0. A kernel that most people don't use yet because it was so recently deemed "stable." 2.4 has not been deprecated and most distributions will stick with it for a while... or offer both as options. Or some like Red Hat will back-port functionality they want from 2.6 into the tried-and-true 2.4 kernel.

FreeBSD (which is ten times the Unix that Linux claims to be) now has full x86-64 support.

Of course, there's also the fact that moving to 64-bit code really offers little advantage for most people. And those that will gain the most are probably using BSD. But I guess you zealots will brag about anything.
Posted by: threedaysdwn   Posted on: 02/05/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Largest software company is the last to the 64 bit table!  Bobby Sskcat | 02/04/04
You're right!  Salman Pak | 02/04/04
Sort of...  John L. Ries | 02/04/04
And?  vdraken | 02/04/04
And?  SC-man | 02/04/04
Not the first  ShadeTree | 02/04/04
Speaking of "can't think for themsleves"...  KTLA | 02/04/04
fool  Bobby Sskcat | 02/04/04
Yeah right!  vdraken | 02/04/04
Ummm..it was an obvious joke  Bobby Sskcat | 02/04/04
Perhaps you're not so welcome in the computer industry  KTLA | 02/04/04
Tool  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
Linux 64 Bit  Northwolf | 02/05/04
Would someone PLEASE give him a history lesson!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 02/05/04
Oh really now ... Bobby Sskcat  jjworleyeoe | 02/04/04
Wrong again.  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
Largest Software Company?  savagesteve13 | 02/05/04
Not true.  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
Bug and Viruse Attacks twice as fast???  MacCanuck | 02/04/04
Twice as complex.. with encryption!  Xunil_Sierutuf | 02/04/04
no, No, NO!!!  BitTwiddler | 02/04/04
Yeap  savagesteve13 | 02/05/04
You're forgetting NX.  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
Things are looking up for AMD  John L. Ries | 02/04/04
Things are looking very bad for Intel  savagesteve13 | 02/05/04
No, they are last, but they have WAY more migration issues on the deskto...  Heatlesssun | 02/04/04
Another NT for Alpha?  Franklin_z | 02/04/04
What about the Win16/32 bit fiasco?  EK_z | 02/04/04
Face it, M$ was LAST to AMD64, a platform one year old.  dicktaurus@... | 02/04/04
You're wrong too.  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
Psst.... first one is free....  Xunil_Sierutuf | 02/04/04
Huh?  vdraken | 02/04/04
Duh. "Psst, the first one is free," said the drug pusher...  dicktaurus@... | 02/04/04
at least they are not trying the  JWatson77 | 02/05/04
thirdPartyInterfeability ?  pj-xmesh | 02/04/04
ThirdPartyInterferability  pj-xmesh | 02/04/04
OEMs  Michael Kelly | 02/04/04
hah 64bit  optimaloptimusprime | 02/04/04
Nice try  KTLA | 02/04/04
yeah right mickysoft ***kisser  optimaloptimusprime | 02/04/04
Heh  KTLA | 02/05/04
Don't quit your day job.  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
ANOTHER Windows OS variant???  Dave P. | 02/04/04
You people...  threedaysdwn | 02/05/04
are there any benchmarks against 32 bit Windows?  dg mh | 02/04/04
Everyone knows....  ONEstar | 02/04/04
Let' see  michael-t | 02/04/04
64 bit ms windows!  michael-t | 02/04/04
64 bit ms windows!  Pacito | 02/06/04
64 bit processor  millerrng | 02/04/04
not mac chip  optimaloptimusprime | 02/04/04
Cool, 64bit solitaire should smoke  Prognosticator | 02/04/04
Oh Come On People  savagesteve13 | 02/05/04
I need more power MR Scott!  cmore | 02/05/04
Thats all fine and dandy, but.....  savagesteve13 | 02/05/04
Windows and Solaris will soon be available for my Itanic!  JusTheFaxMam | 02/05/04
Windows XP  tslocum7 | 02/05/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement