Windows Vista delay indicates Conroe delay
Microsoft announced that it will delay consumer Windows Vista to January 2007. This is another indication that Intel's Israeli amateurs are still working on cloning AMD64 instruction set. Previously, I stated that Intel's failure to demo any 64 bit capability of the so called NGMA during the IDF was an indication that current NGMA implementations are IA32 only.
On the other hand, businesses will be able to enjoy business version Windows Vista on AMD64 according to original schedule of November, in coordination with AMD's big push into commercial client space. On the server end, we know Microsoft has standardized on Opteron.
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 3/21/2006 03:38:00 PM
12 Comments:
Certainly that's a strong possibility, considering the history of Windows XP x64 edition. Microsoft obviously delayed the release of that OS to accomodate Intel, although many Microsoft apologists suggested that this was merely due to Microsoft developer's standard incompetance (how's that for an "apology"?). Microsoft got beaten to market by Linux by over 2 years, despite being given special attention by AMD; and then the kicker, Microsoft got beaten to market by Sun's Solaris by six months, despite the fact that they only started their port one year after AMD64 was released!
I personally think this will be the thing that will finally destroy Microsoft's Windows franchise. People are less dependent on PCs than they were even a couple of years ago. Cellphones, PDAs, MP3 & portable video players all do the major tasks that you could only do with a PC a few years ago. Linux will eat the rest of the Microsoft's flesh.
AMD is taking out Intel, and Linux and the gadgets can take out Microsoft. The whole Wintel monopoly will finally be finished, both from a hardware and software position. Bill Gates doesn't even see he's setting up his own company for a fall by accomodating Intel so much. Two birds with one stone.
Steve Jobs is the greatest fool. He should have made MacOS for AMD64 and allow people to just buy the software, it would be like printing money: one CD, two hundred dollars.
Someone was running MacOS on an AMD 64 recently, I remember seeing a screenshot somewhere. Now if only Apple could get over their exclusive computers, and allow their os to run on all computers. They have said before that the mac computer is really about the os, not the hardware it runs on. Then Microsoft would have some real competition for desktop os.
One would think by the constant referral to the "Israeli amateurs" that you were somewhat if not blatantly anti-semitic. I am not Jewish myself, but certainly one could draw that conclusion.
Seems as if you have absolutely nothing good to ever say about Intel.
The company has done well in its lifetime and certainly has brought many innovations to market. Just like Microsoft, they have had a large legacy to support while AMD was able to cherry pick the best features and copy the Intel instruction set in the past.
Now, Intel has done a completely new architecture in Itanium and while it has not been very successful, it was thought at the time that the 64 bit code would not work that well on X86 when they started it...AMD proved them wrong although Itanium systems do perform well if you have the budget to rewrite all your code to run on them.
Same goes for RAMBUS on P4 at the start...DDR did not exist when they started work on it so they found one that would. Intel has had market share losses before and their response has usually been enough to knock AMD's gains for a loop. Conroe parts are sampling now, and they have been well reviewed by more than Anand, so I think that the parts are going to make it on time and the Vista delays are resultant of Microsoft delays, not Intel.
As for myself, I have both company's products. I'm typing this on a Pentium 4 based notebook, an Alienware like 7700 beast or whatever (It's not an Alienware) and my desktop workstation is a self-built Tyan 2892 board with dual 875's installed (bought on e-Bay for $500 apiece last year) - an awesome system and so fast I don't have to wait for anything.
I say let's wait and see how they both do...the one thing for sure, the competition is great for the user, so enjoy!
Come on, there is nothing anti-semitic here. "Israeli amateurs" refer to the amateurish Intel Israel folks, who brag all day, but failed to implment 64 bit features. Core Duo is a joke, no 64 bits 3 years after Opteron launch. Instead, what I heard was two 32 bit cores are better than one 64 bit core from Mooly Eden.
If Intel Israel can get AMD64 correctly implemented in the next six months, I will stop calling them amateurs, instead, I will call them apprentices -- they have a lot to learn from the grand masters at AMD, who grew up with 64 bit chips such as DEC Alpha, IBM Power and SUN Sparc.
Don't even think they are experts because they are part of Intel, what they are doing is just patching Bob Colwell's P3.
I am lobbying in the valley of Silicon for a standalone MAC OS release sometime in 2007 or 2008. I know a few guys who have managed to take the OS from the Core Duo Macs and put it on their own PCs. Steve Jobs really should listen to us because this could be the key to bringing down Microsoft. Bill Gates made Steve look like a fool in the late 90s when he began promoting MS Office for Mac. Now it's Jobs' turn to show Gates who is the real pimp daddy in the PC business.
Really, you can't expect Apple to make a big jump so quickly. They are in process of moving to x86, and MacTel is still running on an emulator.
MicroSoft has been pushing Longhorn/Vista back since 2004. If they could get it to market they would, regardless of their relationship with Intel. Business is business.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
All users need is performance...not whether the system is 64 bit or 32 bit...Why are you obsessed with 64 bit stuff man? Does not make sense...People want a nice computer that does what they expect...they don't care whether it is 64 bit or 32 bit. Get yourself a life...don't post use less stuff.
You want performance? AMD64 runs up to 40% faster under 64 bit mode. An 2.2GHZ AMD64 under 64 bit will be as fast as an 3.1 GHZ AMD64 under 32 bit. A correctly implemented 64 bit chip is exactly how we get more performance, that's why GameCube, Xbox360, PS3 all use 64 bit chips. Furthermore, AMD64 can run IA32 code under 64 bit, often at higher speed, you don't lose anything.
I don't know. I jumped on the 64-bit bandwagon in Oct. 2003 with a 1.6GHz G5 for my home computer. I'm still using my 32-bit dual 800MHz G4 at the office every day (Final Cut, PhotoShop, MS Office primarily). I move files freely back and forth and have never once thought "Gee, I wish I was on my 64-bit Mac." There just isn't a huge difference yet and it's going on 3 years since I made the jump.
Post a Comment
<< Home