Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > 128-Bit Dimdows Nonsense

Reply
Thread Tools

128-Bit Dimdows Nonsense

 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.

<http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/windows_7/windows_8_in_2012_maybe_-_but_with_128bit_architecture.html>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009

"Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in message
news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>


Yes, it is.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Sailor Sam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
impossible wrote:
>
> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>

>
> Yes, it is.


Why?
 
Reply With Quote
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009

"Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> impossible wrote:
>>
>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in message
>> news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>

>>
>> Yes, it is.

>
> Why?


Why do you ask, Larry?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Sailor Sam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
impossible wrote:
>
> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>> impossible wrote:
>>>
>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
>>> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, it is.

>>
>> Why?

>
> Why do you ask, Larry?


So, you have no idea then?
 
Reply With Quote
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009

"Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:hf7g7b$bsc$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> impossible wrote:
>>
>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
>>>> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it is.
>>>
>>> Why?

>>
>> Why do you ask, Larry?

>
> So, you have no idea then?


You mean you haven't got a clue?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Sailor Sam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
impossible wrote:
>
> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:hf7g7b$bsc$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>> impossible wrote:
>>>
>>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
>>>>> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it is.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Why do you ask, Larry?

>>
>> So, you have no idea then?

>
> You mean you haven't got a clue?


On what the big deal about 128 bit is, no, not at all, why else would I
(politely) ask?
 
Reply With Quote
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009

"Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:hf7gn9$ddi$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> impossible wrote:
>>
>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:hf7g7b$bsc$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>> news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
>>>>>> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why?
>>>>
>>>> Why do you ask, Larry?
>>>
>>> So, you have no idea then?

>>
>> You mean you haven't got a clue?

>
> On what the big deal about 128 bit is, no, not at all, why else would I
> (politely) ask?


Oh, I thought you were (politely) asking why the anti-Microsoft blogosphere
is considered to be so disreputable. Good to see you appreeciate just how
bad your source material really is, Larry....oops, I mean "Sailor" (such a
cute couple!)

128 bit? Hmmm....I'm guessing that when linux goes there you'll be
irrepressibly giddly about the technology. Oh, wait...no....you're actually
counting on everythingt getting smaller and smaller, aren't you? Why waste
128 bits when 8 will do just fine to run EMACS? Ok, got it. You're not
biased or anything, Larry, I'm sure -- just a classic Luddite. Isn't that
so?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Sailor Sam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
impossible wrote:
>
> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:hf7gn9$ddi$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>> impossible wrote:
>>>
>>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:hf7g7b$bsc$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Sailor Sam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>> news:hf7fpo$96t$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
>>>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
>>>>>>> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>>>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, it is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you ask, Larry?
>>>>
>>>> So, you have no idea then?
>>>
>>> You mean you haven't got a clue?

>>
>> On what the big deal about 128 bit is, no, not at all, why else would
>> I (politely) ask?

>
> Oh, I thought you were (politely) asking why the anti-Microsoft
> blogosphere is considered to be so disreputable. Good to see you
> appreeciate just how bad your source material really is, Larry....oops,
> I mean "Sailor" (such a cute couple!)
>
> 128 bit? Hmmm....I'm guessing that when linux goes there you'll be
> irrepressibly giddly about the technology. Oh, wait...no....you're
> actually counting on everythingt getting smaller and smaller, aren't
> you? Why waste 128 bits when 8 will do just fine to run EMACS? Ok, got
> it. You're not biased or anything, Larry, I'm sure -- just a classic
> Luddite. Isn't that so?


Look, if you don't know either, that's fine. There's nothing to get
worked up about, nobody expects you to know (anything).

I just asked a simple polite question, because, quite frankly, I don't
see what the fuss is. You'll recall 64 bit CPUs have been on the market
for about 15 years now, and it was AMD that moved the x86 world to the
64 bit age.

The fact that Linux, and *BSD, and Solaris moved faster to the 64 bit
systems is of no consequence, but thanks for bringing it up.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Carnations
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-03-2009
On Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:33:43 +0000, impossible wrote:

> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <(E-Mail Removed)_zealand> wrote in
> message news:hf75eo$9ek$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hard to believe that people are taking this seriously.

>
> Yes, it is.


Heh heh.

What's the betting that M$ still has "undocumented" 16 bit code *somewhere* in its Operating System.

At this time I see little point for a toy such as M$ Windows to be ported to 128 bit hardware. It took
Microsoft the best part of 10 years to release a reasonably finished version of MS WindowsNT 6.0.x.

In addition Micro$oft has only recently released a 64bit iteration of M$ Windows that is close-ish to
being stable due to its extreme reliance on third party drivers.

Given the maximum RAM addressing capacity of 64bit hardware I see no value in moving away from
64bit architecture - at least for another 10 years - as I can't see any purpose for a toy desktop OS that
would need to address more than 17.2 billion gigs of RAM, virtual or otherwise.


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Generics in 1.5, nonsense warnings? changzhouwang@gmail.com Java 4 11-17-2005 09:06 PM
Whats all this nonsense with "REPOST" in the subject line? Gordon Computer Support 4 03-17-2005 08:23 PM
Tired of Nonsense Sasha Y. Gupta MCSE 26 07-15-2004 07:53 PM
virus nonsense David, the fen-sucked, staring flyswatter Computer Support 16 07-05-2004 11:04 PM
Why the nonsense in spam emails? Dan Welch Computer Support 3 10-08-2003 06:52 AM



Advertisments