Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Wed 7th Oct 2009 19:15 UTC, submitted by JayDee
Microsoft has been thinking about Windows 8 for a while now even through the production of Windows 7. Some information has been gathered by our friends over at Ars, and all of this said information points to possible 128-bit versions of Windows 8 and definite 128-bit versions of Windows 9. Update: Other technophiles better-versed than I in this whole 64/128-bit business pointed out that it must be for the filesystem (such as ZFS described in this article) rather than the processor and memory scheme.
Thread beginning with comment 388243
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-11-23
Can't agree with with that [at least not in one point]. You wrote that :
Yes, software does need to be changed to incorporate these "new" attributes as they become available, but doing so does nothing to address its quality - it is simply enabling additional modes of operation.
Don't you think that this sort of thinking has something to do with this lost of quality in favor of [over]growth of the functionality? Do we really need 128-bit?
My answer is simple - no. And the world doesn't even ends on the gamers and server market. In fact - these are the separate niches, but one of them is in a position to dictate the "hardware revolutions".
I agree that introducing 128-bit will somehow improve capability of the modern SW+HW issue, but it will introduce many other problems. Just look at the 64-bit ...
Regards
RE[3]: Comment by marcp
by modmans2ndcoming on Sun 11th Oct 2009 19:12
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by marcp"
Member since:2005-11-09
Do you need it? no... do scientists with small grants who might want to buy a eight core 128 bit processor to run high precision modeling software with in a reasonable budget want it? sure. Rendering farms in Hollywood? Military? Those in the chip industry interested in unifying the instruction space? Absolutely.
Will the mom and pop end user see any real benefit? not really but so what?
Member since:
2006-01-25
In overall summary I think that it's all about quality, not quantity.
Your talking about software quality. That has nothing to do with 32-bit vs 64-bit vs 128-bit or anything in between. Those are attributes of the underlying hardware. Yes, software does need to be changed to incorporate these "new" attributes as they become available, but doing so does nothing to address its quality - it is simply enabling additional modes of operation. Some software can take advantage of increased address space, additional registers, large integers, etc., but frankly for most software it doesn't matter one bit (pun intended).
I'm only responding to this because while I agree that software quality is definitely an issue, it is a _seperate_ issue. And the software worlds inability to get its collective sh*t together has nothing to do with whether or not moving from xx-bit to yy-bit is actually _useful_. Moving from 32-bit to 64-bit was most definitely useful, regardless of how crappy software still tends to be.