Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 17th May 2007 14:58 UTC, submitted by danwarne
Windows "It's the end of the line for 32-bit operating systems, Microsoft has proclaimed at its annual Windows Hardware Engineering conference After the software giant has gotten over its hangover from partying like it's 1999 with the release of Windows Server 2008, it will have one last 32-bit hurrah with a 'release 2' update to Windows Server 2008, and that'll be it. 32 bit CPU: if you have one, learn to love Vista - you're stuck with it.There will be no more versions of Windows - on desktop or server - that will work on 32-bit CPUs like Pentium 4 or Core Duo."
Thread beginning with comment 241098
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Dumb
by macro on Thu 17th May 2007 15:50 UTC in reply to "RE: Dumb"
macro
Member since:
2005-07-27

existing 32bit CPUs barely can handle Vista and when next version of Windows comes out those CPUs will be way too weak to run it


Correction:

"Vista can barely run on existing 32 bit CPUs and the next version that comes out will be way too bloated to run on them."

The problem is that windows is a bloated piece of crap, not that current 32 bit processors are "weak". And, as others have noted, it's unfortunately not a windows-only problem anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Dumb
by Henrik on Fri 18th May 2007 01:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Dumb"
Henrik Member since:
2006-01-03

Exactly, it's not a windows problem, every version of windows I've used, from 3.1 to XP, has had a much more responsive feel in its UI than any KDE or Gnome based Linux distribution I've tried, so far.

And most important, the XP version of Windows (like a few newer distibutions) finally reduced the very unpractical and unacceptable boot times of earlier versions, on normal hardware. (and yes, you are supposed to turn the computer off when it's not used...)

I don't like MS much, but they certainly seems to pay much more attention to detailed optimization and fine-tuning than does most of the Linux community.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Dumb
by RawMustard on Fri 18th May 2007 05:49 in reply to "RE[3]: Dumb"
RawMustard Member since:
2005-10-10

My Xp running on a core 2 Duo E6600 with 4 gig of ram and an nvidia 8800gtx gpu runs like a dog compared to Ubuntu Feisty 32 bit and feisty 64bit is even faster and smoother. I admit that the Gnome desktop is a monkeyMono infested pig, but Nautilus on feisty leaves explorer in it's dust!

As far boot times go, I have no background tasks in windows other than the regular firewall and av crap-ware, but I have several apps loading in Ubuntu. I'm up and running and on my first website in Ubuntu before i even get a login screen in XP and you know how long windows desktop takes to be usable, so I'd be finished reading my first osnews article before I can open the start menu in XP. XP is a dog compared to new Linux distro's and vista, well I won't even bother going there, it'd take way toooo long ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Dumb
by keith.unix on Sat 19th May 2007 02:23 in reply to "RE[2]: Dumb"
keith.unix Member since:
2007-05-08

Yes, windows is a bloated piece, and kde is a little bloated, but you can also choose, which desktop you can run, or run nothing at all, with a linux/bsd distro.

How many different desktops can you choose from for windows?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Window_manager

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEPIS

Reply Parent Score: 1