Filed under: OS Updates, Hardware, News, Windows, Blogging, Microsoft, Windows x64
Excited about 128 bit "Windows 8"? Don't hold your breath.
by Grant Robertson Oct 8th 2009 at 4:05PM
I got a message yesterday directing me to some groundbreaking post on Ars Technica, in which the long-winded and storied tale of an in-development 128 bit version of Windows unfolded like something out of a geek spy novel.Bullpuckey, I said. Shenanigans, I mumbled. "It must be fairy tale time over at Conde Nast", I thought to myself, and quickly moved on. I never in my wildest dreams would have figured this had legs. Surely I wasn't the only one to spot the giant hole in the middle of this story.Robert Morgan is working to get IA-128 working backwards with full binary compatibility on the existing IA-64 instructions in the hardware simulation to work for Windows 8 and definitely Windows 9.
Today, I read it on Slashdot. So, before Windows 8 for IA-128 becomes the digital equivalent of Sasquatch or the Loch Ness Monster, I figured it was prudent to point out the itty, bitty, tiny little problem that's keeping this story from having any basis in reality.
There is no IA-128. The Abominable Snowman and the Easter Bunny could hold a press conference about the lost sex tapes of The Tooth Fairy and it would have more credibility than this rumor. In fact, calling it a rumor lends too much credence to the story. There may be a Robert Morgan, there certainly is a Windows 8, but there is no IA-128.
IA-64 was Intel's joint venture with HP to create a next generation 64 bit server processor. Finally released far behind schedule, the Itanium line has been beset with problems. Poor performance, a lagging upgrade path, and poor vendor uptake have all conspired to create what John Dvorak recently called, "one of the great fiascoes of the last 50 years""
So, while the editors at Ars are busy explaining to Emil Protalinski that there is no Santa Claus, it's probably the right moment to point out that you shouldn't believe everything you read on forums. Or, Slashdot. Or apparently Ars, for that matter.
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
So, just how good at time waster games are you? Think you've got the stuff? Well, The World's Hardest Game 2.0 doesn't think you do.
Yes, amazingly, it's possible to have a sequel to a game called "The World's Hardest Game". It doesn't seem logically possible, since if the first one was actually the world's hardest, how could another one come along and share the moniker? It made me doubt the name in the first place. That is, until I tried the game.
The mechanics of the game are very simple. You are a small red square, ...
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mko said 4:19PM on 10-08-2009
Meh Amd256 is much better
Reply
KeegdnaB said 7:05PM on 10-08-2009
Nah man, it's all about amd512
216 said 4:34PM on 10-08-2009
lets just skip all the non sense and get to IA1080 already
Reply
Grant Robertson said 4:37PM on 10-08-2009
Better still.. x86-IA1080p w/7.1 surround.
Oh, and turbo-charged. With extra sauce. Premium Ultimate Home Enterprise Additional Superlatives Edition!
mko said 4:43PM on 10-08-2009
It's over 9000
Cam said 5:13PM on 10-08-2009
"Better still.. x86-IA1080p w/7.1 surround.
Oh, and turbo-charged. With extra sauce. Premium Ultimate Home Enterprise Additional Superlatives Edition!"
Which, when all the adjectives are added, make it about as fast as the original x86 architecture. No gain.
sRc said 4:45PM on 10-08-2009
you're all just jealous of my nvinteldiamd-65536
Reply
Rocketboy_X said 5:28PM on 10-08-2009
Why would there be? 64 bit Windows is a rare sight already.
Reply
kojo87 said 11:31PM on 10-08-2009
um not really. i have it on every machine i have thats 64bit capable. many of my friends run it as well. it is better than x86 on the right hardware
Rocketboy_X said 12:51PM on 10-12-2009
Not really a great sample size. I talk to people in Canada and the US all day long, and only about 10% (at the most) have a 64 bit PC.
cmsb55 said 1:12AM on 10-17-2009
Not really. I have been running 64 bit too and all of my friends use 64 bit. I know this is a small sample size but I'm sure there are many other people just like me.
Josh said 5:38PM on 10-08-2009
Yeah, but it would still have to be backward compatible because somebody wants to run their legacy software from Windows 2000.
Even Snow Leopard for the Mac still asks if you want to install Rosetta.......wtf.
Reply
mah said 8:54AM on 10-10-2009
are you really holding up apple as the paragon of backward compatibility?
Ray said 6:32PM on 10-08-2009
"There is no IA-128. The Abominable Snowman and the Easter Bunny could hold a press conference about the lost sex tapes of The Tooth Fairy and it would have more credibility than this rumor"
LMFAO! Great line... That's going in my quote book.
Reply
Oleg said 6:43PM on 10-09-2009
Part of «Robert Morgan»'s profile is directly copypasted from http://markdcarlson.wordpress.com/2008/09/06/mark-carlson-it-director/
So it seems there is no Robert Morgan.
Reply
Grant Robertson said 6:44PM on 10-09-2009
Ha! There is a distinct level of awesome to that. Thanks Oleg.