Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:18:09 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky <erich@apsara.com.sg> To: Mark Stapper <stark@mapper.nl> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core Message-ID: <200908061718.10505.erich@apsara.com.sg> In-Reply-To: <4A7A9709.9070803@mapper.nl> References: <200908051414.49468.david@vizion2000.net> <200908061631.04639.erich@apsara.com.sg> <4A7A9709.9070803@mapper.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote: > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the > > Itanium? > > The one that didn't stick... indeed. do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers? I have not seen one in the wild. > > > 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? > > As I was an embryo when the 80386 was first produced, I > searched for this one... > Possibally the same thing though: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432 Oh, yes, the 4 was missing. Erich
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200908061718.10505.erich>