Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Microsoft mulling 128-bit versions of Win8, Win9

08 Oct 2009   #41
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Lebon14 View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Lebon14 View Post
GAWD.
Who will EVER use the full potential of a x128 machine?!? x128 may be ready for Win8 and/or Win9 but a normal user using the full potential of a x128 platform isn't for either Win8 or Win9. It will be MUCH MUCH later.
You must be a casual user.

I would love to do some data modeling in the 128-bit realm.
I have 2GB of RAM and a 32-bit system... I didn't even really use all of my 2GB of RAM... Why would I need 1M+TB of RAM on a x128 machine?!?
Often, the answer to a question is the question itself, and here, the answer is obvious. You would not.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
08 Oct 2009   #42
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by jimbo45 View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
To all those who would argue that we do not need this kind of power on the desktop today - Speak for yourself.

I would have an immediate use for the ability to solve for a 20 layer deep time-of-day sensitive LCR solution for 1,000+ international terminations in real-time.

Today, I settle for three layers. And it takes a half-hour.

Hi there
and I thought that deriving and solving the equations of motion of a Supermarket trolley was difficult.

Cheers
jimbo
Fortunately, I can solve one problem with a 32-bit browser in a 64-bit platform - google/ supermarket trolley

Oh. Grocery cart.

.


Attached Images
Microsoft mulling 128-bit versions of Win8, Win9-shopping_trolley_shopping_cart_supermarket_trolley.jpg 
My System SpecsSystem Spec
08 Oct 2009   #43
Scotteq

Windows 7 (x64)
 
 

Ant - That is, indeed, a container of more than adequate size... But I have a concern the 128 bits will fall through the steel mesh.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

08 Oct 2009   #44
paesan

windows 7 7600 x 64 16385
 
 

Bring it on MS. There is nothing wrong with trying to push the proverbial envelope. I remember when I bought a pentium 233 with 32 megs of ram with a 6 gig HD and my friends said that was overkill...................LMAO. I agree that software companies are behind the curve with 64 bit programs but I am all for improvements. Don't hate change, instead embrace it. Many people fear the unknown!!!!!!
My System SpecsSystem Spec
08 Oct 2009   #45
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by paesan View Post
Bring it on MS. There is nothing wrong with trying to push the proverbial envelope. I remember when I bought a pentium 233 with 32 megs of ram with a 6 gig HD and my friends said that was overkill...................LMAO. I agree that software companies are behind the curve with 64 bit programs but I am all for improvements. Don't hate change, instead embrace it. Many people fear the unknown!!!!!!
I don't know about that. Sounds scary.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
08 Oct 2009   #46
Lee

Win 7 Pro x64, VM Win XP, Win7 Pro Sandbox, Kubuntu 11
 
 

Let me ask you all a question: "How many of you are going to turn down a chance to be the first owner of a 128 bit system, and also be the first on the beta list to test the new OS for a 128 bit system.

I know my name is going to be at the top (if I live that long).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
08 Oct 2009   #47
Antman

 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Lee View Post
Let me question you all a question: "How many of you are going to turn down a chance to be the first owner of a 128 bit system, and also be the first on the beta list to test the new OS for a 128 bit system.

I know my name is going to be at the top (if I live that long).
FTW
My System SpecsSystem Spec
08 Oct 2009   #48
H2SO4

Win7x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Lee View Post
Let me question you all a question: "How many of you are going to turn down a chance to be the first owner of a 128 bit system, and also be the first on the beta list to test the new OS for a 128 bit system.

I know my name is going to be at the top (if I live that long).
FTW
I'd like to offer a counterpoint, but only because I'm like that, not because I'm not excited by the thought of bigger and better computers. (I totally agree with Lee, and with Antman's "FTW".)

As Clive Sinclair reportedly retorted when somebody asked him why he settled for the 8-bit Z80 processor in his ZX Spectrum (at a time when 16-bit architectures were becoming available), "because I couldn't find a 4-bit chip I really liked."

The outwardly facetious comment is in fact insightful.

Previously, the transition to greater "bittiness" was always forced upon us by simple mathematical exhaustion of the describable memory address range. The 16-bit [segment: offset] addressing scheme was designed to defeat the overly limiting 64KB flat address space. Even so, 1MB became insufficient within a few years. When the first 80386 PC came out in the mid-80s, the 32-bit machine was capable of a flat 4GB address space. That was sufficient or adequate for around two decades. By the mid-90s, large databases were pushing the envelope, so as a stopgap Intel brought out 36-bit addressing and PAE for a grand total of 64GB. It wasn't uncommon for massive server systems to nudge against that limit by 2000 or a few years later.

The 64-bit address space is 16 exabytes in size. However, Windows currently artificially limits itself to a mere fraction of that (though that will change in future versions). This time around, we are not even close to exhausting the address space yet, so the talk of double the bittiness is being driven by other factors.

The number of available general purpose registers, the way they are used, the efficiency of the calling convention... Currently, the potential of a new architecture is more exciting because of the chance to improve in those areas than because of the meaninglessly vast 128-bit address space. Even the 64-bit one we've got now is still almost entirely empty.

I expect that none of this would be happening yet if Intel could achieve greater uptake of their IA-64 product.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
09 Oct 2009   #49
swarfega

Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
 
 

http://community.winsupersite.com/bl...-only-lol.aspx

Thurrot says this is a bogus rumour.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
09 Oct 2009   #50
Antman

 

Robert Morgan - LinkedIn

The seed - as archived at Google.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Microsoft mulling 128-bit versions of Win8, Win9




Thread Tools




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Microsoft: We aren't going to have three different versions of Windows
Read more at: Microsoft: We aren't going to have three different versions of Windows | ZDNet
News
Microsoft Mulling Nook Media LLC Purchase For $1 Billion
Source A Guy
News
Installed Ubuntu,Win8. Now if I select Win8 in Grub it won't start.
Can someone please help me. I installed Windows 8. Then created a new partition and installed Ubuntu on it. But now if I want to select Windows 8 in Grub, it waits a couple of seconds and then restarts Grub. :( Image: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0BEPJLJ19P2NlFrTnZORlE3T0U Has anyone an...
Installation & Setup
Opening older versions of Microsoft using 2010.
I cannot open any of my documents that were previously saved using an older version of microsoft. I just got a new computer using Windows seven and updated to Microsoft 2010...HELP!!!
Microsoft Office
why microsoft launches too many versions of win7
Hello Friends I want to point out something why Microsoft launching too many versions of win7 . all beta versions r confusing or its a new marketing style of Microsoft. if they have an expert team (all engineers) etc. then why they confuse us by launching too many beta versions....
General Discussion


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:42.
Twitter Facebook Google+ Seven Forums iOS App Seven Forums Android App