With Windows 7 not even released it seems interesting to discuss future revisions of everyone's favourite operating system (well not me, I prefer OSX but thats a discussion for another day). I was reading a great article on Ars Technica yesterday which discussed the fact that a Linkedin profile for Robert Morgan, Senior Research and Development at Microsoft (recently removed) detailed: Working in high security department for research and development involving strategic planning for medium and longterm projects. Research & Development projects including 128bit architecture compatibility with the Windows 8 kernel and Windows 9 project plan. Forming relationships with major partners: Intel, AMD, HP, and IBM. 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. Windows 8 News found his profile and immediately tried to get in touch with him over the Linkedin private messaging system. They managed to arrange an interview and are asking the public for questions. The deadline is tomorrow, so if any of you guys wish to head over and ask him questions about Windows 8/9, now is the time! Ask your questions over here
wow, 64bit isn't even standard yet, and they're talking about 128bit? well, progress is progress - someone has to start development
That indicates our system ram will soon be in the TByte range. Mem tests then will take days to complete if bus speeds do not at least double
pff...don't know why are the doing this...we barely use 64x architecture, and limits are not going to be reached for a while... i don't know if the 128bit os would make any sense...
I doubt there will be a commercial Windows version 128bit for the next version of Windows. Or the one after that. I am not against it, but you kinda need the hardware to run it first, don't you?
I'm not sure if this isn't someone's prank. Also, they are talking about IA-128 and IA-64. Those are Itanium instruction sets. Does that mean that x86 and AMD64 are to be abandoned? Or maybe it's going to support 128-bit CPUs, but only in the server segment. If this isn't a hoax, I'm guessing that the latter will be the case, desktop versions will stay with AMD64 architecture, while server versions will support IA-128.
Probably, I'm surprised they did it for win7 but there's still 32bit machines being used in businesses so they had to (sort of....)
How do they think they can be sure of it working when they haven't got a 128-bit CPU to USE IT ON yet!? Leave it to ol' Micro$haft to shaft themselves as well as us.
Well.. considering that it's been almost 6-7 years since the ininitial availability of a 64bit windows OS... Hasn't the 64bit of linux been available for nearly 15 years? I think they are more concerned with super computers hitting the maximums rather then consumers.... would have been nice if 64bit would have taken off in 2003... but like usual, everyones back peddling on massive advancements with the unfortunate thought of "we don't need it yet" until it's to late and people get set in their ways. Sooner the better imo...
It's PROGRESS indeed but they should start by forcing 64-bit for Windows 7 at least ... I don't see to many uses for 32-bit. Seems if you buy a new computer at Best Buy or whatever, it comes with 4gb ram and a DX10.1 video card ... you kind of need 64-bit there if I'm not mistaken? progress progress .... 64-bit OS'es have been around for quite a few years now (Win XP 64... remember that "Project" ?) Vista x64 was successful in my eyes, and so far Windows 7 x64 is just plain fantastic. keep progressing
Whenever I download drivers for my vista 64, I always also see drivers for XP64, great support now as far as I can guess.
There was full blown xp x64 support before there was vista x64 support.. Since i'd say between 2005 and 2006.... XP x64 has been excellent and very well supported..
