Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 16:31:02 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky <erich@apsara.com.sg> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Mark Stapper <stark@mapper.nl> Subject: Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core Message-ID: <200908061631.04639.erich@apsara.com.sg> In-Reply-To: <4A7A79BC.1030600@mapper.nl> References: <200908051414.49468.david@vizion2000.net> <200908050654.26375.mel.flynn%2Bfbsd.questions@mailing.thruhere.net> <4A7A79BC.1030600@mapper.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On 06 August 2009 pm 14:35:40 Mark Stapper wrote: > Mel Flynn wrote: > > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 05:27:55 Erik Trulsson wrote: > >> The amd64 architecture is called that because it was AMD who > >> invented and created it and was for a while the only one > > Now I come to think of it, isn't it strange apple(or IBM) never > joined in the whole 64-bits naming race spactacle. Because people using them, new what they were doing. > Nor have I ever heard the term RISC64. Too bad we won't have to > worry about that anymore, since PowerPC is dead and Mac Pro's > are now amd64(or Intel 64 or x86-64 whichever would be the IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the Itanium? Yes, also Intel can fail. Intel also failed with their first 32 bit design. Wasn't iAPX-32 ist name? Long before the 80386 came up? Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200908061631.04639.erich>