[OT] End-user uses for x86-64 (was: Why are still not at 64 bits)

[Jerry Feldman]

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 11:00:29 -0500
Jason Stephenson <jason at sigio.com> wrote:

> Sixty-four bitness will never matter to end users, but it will become 
> ubiquitous over time, and sooner or later nearly everyone will have 
> computers and devices with 64 bit CPUs and operating systems and the 
> vast majority of people won't really notice.
It certainly will become ubiquitous because the last time I checked
both AMD and Intel's roadmap, they will only be making 64-bit chips.
(Not sure about the embedded market). 

For the routine home user, 64-bits should make their computers perform
better because of the linear address space and graphics support. But,
for the average home user, the mount of memory is more important than
the CPU speed or bitedness. Last year I bought a 64-bit laptop because
I do a lot of 64-bit stuff, but other than that, for my classes at
Northeaster, a 32-bit system would have been just fine. 
-- 
Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20070217/7c9044fa/signature.bin