On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 27 of 31:
Next »
« Previous
IA64 Not going to happen for Desktop
You are correct, that in order for 64 bit machines to become mainstream, eveyone would need new software. That IS the problem, and why it won't happen. Software sales are dismal today, customers do not want to spend money on upgrades - period.

We have customers that are still using our previous DOS versions of products, and refuse to pop for the Win32 upgrades. Not a few, but rather 80% of them. Are they going to be interested in paying for IA64 upgrades? Forget it.

IA64 will see use in servers but not in desktop applications. It is the same problem that keeps Linux from gaining widespread use. Customers don't want to pay for the software upgrades, and software companies cannot produce products for free.

Yes there will be some open-source freeware growing, but only for common applications. The Win32 market contains millions of software products that cover every kind of task and application - 20 years of R&D. It is absurd for anyone to think all that is going to be replaced anytime soon. Impossible. Win32 and IA32 will be around for a very long time. Unfortunately, much longer than MS and Intel would like.
Posted by: Gizmo_z   Posted on: 12/02/03 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

Moore's Law and Intel  cbradshaw@... | 12/01/03
An much more fundamental limit...  Jomo_z | 12/01/03
... Exactly Correct, and also the masses do not need more CPU Power.  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
The Itanium is not a consumer CPU.  balsover | 12/02/03
3rd dimension ?  Goulu | 12/01/03
2008  Peter Komisar | 12/01/03
And how much do you want to pay?  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
Sorry, it doesn't work that way  HalcyonSeven | 12/02/03
Intel scientists running out of tricks  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
Re: Re: Intel scientists running out of tricks  issthatso | 12/01/03
Get a clue  Prognosticator | 12/01/03
Got a clue, do you?  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
They both  rkadowns | 12/01/03
True  MarcB_z | 12/01/03
Haven't heard much about Quantum processors lately  voska | 12/01/03
They are meant to be developing  quantumstate | 06/12/06
RE: valence orbit  JCitizen | 04/27/04
Are you paying attention?  balsover | 12/02/03
RISC development Cycle is still robust  MarcB_z | 12/02/03
Light Cubes  tomr1yarbrough | 12/01/03
Very true and I agree, this is the next step.  rkadowns | 12/01/03
They will find a way.  DonnieBoy | 12/01/03
Brain Speed  Nullifidian | 12/01/03
Brain speed....not!  Jomo_z | 12/01/03
Brain Speed  medezark | 04/26/04
Speed of Light and Speed of design-to-market  michael-t | 12/01/03
IA64 Not going to happen for Desktop  Gizmo_z | 12/02/03
64 bit computing is on the desktop NOW  MarcB_z | 12/02/03
Electrons are never destroyed - it's against the laws of physics!  CobraA1 | 06/12/06
Yes it is badly worded  quantumstate | 06/12/06
The whole moores law thing is getting ridiculous  quantumstate | 06/12/06

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

SmartPlanet

Click Here