Windows XP X64 Goes Gold 359
Kasracer writes "According to The Inquirer, 'Microsoft has released the final version of Windows XP 64 to manufacturing, meaning that those with machines that have 64-32 bit processors in from AMD and latterly Intel can now see what the extra addressing brings to the party.'"
correction (Score:0, Insightful)
Now only a few more years..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Longhorn (Score:1, Insightful)
Let them take all the time they want on implementing Longhorn. Meanwhile, we'll have X running on top of OpenGL with Cairo, plus Beagle on the desktop
Re:Longhorn (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:3, Insightful)
Ditto, there's still a lot of those out there. I would expect Microsoft to drop atleast a 16-bit VM of some sort - specially for a desktop oriented OS.
Wow, another Microsoft public Beta! (Score:3, Insightful)
Great, the people who sold me the Gigabyte AMD64 motherboard will possibly admit there is a 64 bit operating system now...I had a Gigabyte motherboard that as soon as it got out of the bootloader and went 64 Bit, it would reboot! I should have stuck to ASUS originally.
I swapped out the Gigbyte MB, put in an ASUS...same CPU, Memory, everything and I pass the 64 bit transition, and away I went to load 64Bit Linux! Cool.
ttyl
Farrell
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:4, Insightful)
XP x64 has also completely dropped 16bit support. No more old DOS programs. No more Win3.1 programs. More importantly (as I mentioned above), no more installers that used 16 bit code, even for purely 32-bit programs.
I say good riddence.
I too look forward to running XP x64 on my Athlon64. But for the moment, the average Joe just doesn't have that as a realistic option. In another six months, perhaps. But not yet.
Your average Joe probably isn't using a 64 bit x86 chip either.
The transition has to start sometime. If not now, when?
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:1, Insightful)
I remember this same argument circa 1994/1995 with the OS/2 & Win95 battles, and on the fence were the DOS/Desqview and Win 3.1 users crying foul and raising all sorts of bloody hell.
Instead of bitching about what it doesn't support, why not embrace the technology and be a part of helping it move forward?
Slashdot poster in 2020 " Windows 128Bit sucks because it doesn't support my 32 bit WidgetApp from 2002".
Sheesh!
I tested this (Score:1, Insightful)
Good luck to them, but I don't feel like paying to beta test future Longhorn kernels. They should be paying me.
Re:April Fool ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:4, Insightful)
The application itself, probably. But you apparently missed the point about the installer... If you can't install your 32 or 64 bit program, you can't use it.
It might also suprise you just how many programs do still use 16-bit code. A lot of command-line utils, for one. A lot of low-end games (card and puzzle-type), for another. Now, you might say that you never use the command line or play Chips Challenge, in which case, good for you. But most of us just expect our computers to do what we want them to.
Now, with the 32-bit hardware driver problem, I can understand that. But Microsoft already ran 16-bit apps under emulation since the earliest days of NT (via NTVDM or WOW - If you ever see either of those in yout task manager, you still use 16-bit code for something) - I see absolutely no reason whythey would have discontinued that.
Re:can now? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:"extra addressing...." (Score:3, Insightful)
I would absolutely say that the biggest advantage has nothing to do with the address space. The biggest advantage tha Alpha gave us, for the decade where it maintained its performance lead despite benign and not-so-benign neglect, wasn't the larger address space (there were only a few people who actually needed 64 bits), but the huge register bank and celever instruction set (especially the memory barrier instructions, which provided the same capabilities as the IA64 bundles without locking the architecture down to things like counts of function units).
If 64 bits is the gimmick ittakes to shake off even a bit of the dust of the Intel experience, I'm all for it... but for most people that's all it is... a gimmick.
Re:If it went gold (Score:1, Insightful)
Slashdot bias showing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Tiger went gold on April 1 and no time was wasted in posting that news.
Both are closed source operating systems.
Explain.
Re:Is it worth upgrading? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Heh (Score:3, Insightful)
You make me think of Phil Katz, the former boss of the company that made PKZIP. His software was dominant in the DOS days, but he distrusted Windows so much that he refused to port it to Windows 95 when it came out. Like you, he didn't trust Microsoft APIs and wanted to keep full control of what was going on. The result: PKZIP lost the market to WinZip. Don't let your loathing of MS get in the way of good business decisions.
Re:Longhorn (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:64 bits? (Score:2, Insightful)
I haven't. I have not had to do any reinstall of XP, I have not had any significant problems, I have not had a virus, I've had a smooth running computer hosting web pages, running CAD and GIS software, and playing games.
I call for an 'overrated' mod for the parent.