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.'"
Is there a list of softare ready for it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Is it the season? (Score:4, Interesting)
Longhorn (Score:5, Interesting)
Is it worth upgrading? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:Is there a list of softare ready for it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Coincidence (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Longhorn (Score:1, Interesting)
Avalon,
WinFS,
and that other one that nobody cares about..
(notice how all the Avalon/Winfs crap has been 'backported' to WinXP?)
So by working on WinXP, they are working on Longhorn since they are basicly the same.
Cosmeticly they are going to be different, of course, and Longhorn will have more features and updated memory management scemes and such. but it is what it is.
'Blackcomb' was always suppose to be the next 'revolutionary' OS (as in not NT-based like Win2k/WinXP/Longhorn)
It is critical for Longhorn to be released soon.
Since Microsoft switched licensing scemes people are holding off on new contractual orders, while Microsoft keeps offering more and more steep discounts on large new contracts.
IBM even stated that a bank in Europe was offered a contract for 11million dollars from MS to upgrade the office/OS/server licenses, and they went and played the IBM webportal appliation/Linux card between 3-4 million dollars suddenlyh evaporated from the cost.
This June most of the contracts under the old licensing sceme are up and MS needs a new server and desktop OS to go along with a new Office version to rejuvinate intrest.
So basicly people are holding off buying large contracts until they either get bigger discounts, move to Linux servers (Windows desktops still of course), or until something more compelling comes along (longhorn).
And it will. MS will have more sales and Longhorn server/desktop will breath new life into the long term contracts.
Re:Is there a list of softare ready for it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Don't get *too* excited yet... (Score:4, Interesting)
There are traps that intercept them and run an installshield/ect emulation.
Re:The biggest challenge for Windows... (Score:2, Interesting)
Dual boot Redhat/Gnome and Xp and some old hardware. I do this on a 128MB Celeron333Mhz. XP is less sluggish than Linux.
There is more to x86-64 than addressing... (Score:3, Interesting)
Extended addressing might sound nice but in the real world, it translates to no performance improvement unless you have >4GB in your PC while gains from recompiling to use the extra registers (and some rewriting to combine high/low parts into int64s, reducing initial register usage) are often in the 20%-40% range - though this can vary wildly depending on GCC options and across GCC versions.
Well, it is all marketing so Intel's EMT64 campaign does not need to make any technical sense as long as it sells.
nope (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Heh (Score:2, Interesting)
This is simply the OS that's running in 64-bit mode now. The programs are all still 32-bit. (Admittedly, this means a lot more for Windows vs Mac OS, as the underlying command set changes just a bit ia32->x86_64.)
Now, if they could catch up to Redhat 6.0 on alpha, that'd be impressive.
(Note, that while NT was on Alpha, it was treated as a 32-bit arch, and the first fully 64-bit port of Windows was to ia64...the 2nd 64-bit arch it was on... All the sudden I get this feeling of impending doom for x86_64.)
Re:Is there a list of softare ready for it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Heh (Score:4, Interesting)
I prefer to think of it as frontier territory without resource and memory leaks, buggy system calls, and insanely bloated, sourcecode-free "objects" that are larger than most applications used to be but provide unique and special capabilities like "buttons" and "checkmarks."
But that's just me. :-) When I encounter something from Microsoft that is broken (like a file dialog ot the treeview control) then I write my own, make sure it works, fix it ASAP if and when anyone finds anything I missed... so memory where MS's OS fears to tread smells like freedom and clean air. There may not be any toilets, but then again, I don't have to have Microsoft's sewage running all over my applications.
Real conversation from about 2002:
We gave them this [blackbeltsystems.com], instead.Get 64-bit applications now. (Score:5, Interesting)
I run Slamd64 [slamd64.com], the x86-64 Slackware.
Re:Is it the season? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:latterly? & EM64T = AMD's coffin nails? (Score:3, Interesting)
That was exactly what I thought when Intel came out with the reworked xeons to handle 64b. Thing is, Intel cpus have a so large market coverage (and will have) that if most people code for em64t then their code will probably not produce significant speed pushes when recompiled on opterons/fx's. And - so that others also get it clearer - em64t is _not_ a total full amd64 re-implementation. I for one would much more gladly see specifically opteron-coded stuff, because I firmly believe the opterons' architecture is a very good one: _very_ speedy and very low power. Even in this thread a few posts above someone posted some performance data where 3.4ghz xeon64 ran a code slower than an opteron 2.4ghz. Well, nothing new here, same good old amd way of doing cpus. Just what many of us like so much.
Re:Is there a list of softare ready for it? (Score:2, Interesting)