Windows XP 64bit based on AMD design?!

This is qute something as the new Windows 64bit XP is based on AMD 64bit architecture design.

http://money.cnn.com/2003/12/22/technology/techinvestor/hellweg/index.htm

What do you think?

 

WOW. I didn't see that one. All the rumors floating around were that MS would delay XP64 until Intel released their chips. It looks like an alliance between AMD and MS will build. This alliance could bring the mighty Intel to its knees.

 

I remember thinking about AMD taking over the market but didn't know it would come so fast .

 

I would be interested to know if all the Windows XP 64 driver sets from all vendors come as 64bit ready. If so, it would be enough to convince to get an AMD 64 with the new XP. As for security, talk about taking buffer overflow out the door and into the bin.

It is good to see AMD has again gotten their act together since Athlon 1Ghz and beat Intel on desktop 64. The lower end AMD 64 way below $300 retail is another enticing factor. It makes economic sense for them as well.

 

I'm sure once MS gets the OS out the driver will come. Probably be the same timeline as when MS went with the certified driver program. It took some vendors a while to pass the test.
I remember when AMD entered the duallie market. It took over 6 months for C-Media and Creative to get a stable driver out. Blue screens every time you played 2 sounds at a time. I'd have an mp3 playing and if I got a new mail alert blue screen.

 

IIRC there was a press anouncement by Microsoft detailing a few of the plans about 3 months ago, including a statement that they weren't going release 2 seprate 64-bit versions, if Intel wants their chips to be compatible with WinXP 64-bit then they'll have to use the AMD instruction set.

It seems the once great bond between the two giants is largly gone now.

 

Nice to see AMD is going to be right there for the next generation stuff. I always loved my AMD chips...and with the price difference between AMD and Intel, how could anyone buy Intel?

 

I've used AMD since my old AMD K-6 500mhz Stable as hell, I'd never think of going with Intel. One thing that bothers me about 64bit though, apparently a LOT of stuff isnt in XP-64bit that is in 32, such as internet connection sharing etc, how long would it be until all these are included? That's my only worry, other than that, I shall be getting my hands on a 64bit chip asap

 

My guess is quite some time. Several years. These things are hard to change, and we all know how good the net is at adopting standards quickly

 

Once the 64bit OS is gold eveything will work. When MS went from 16bit to 32 bit everything was in place. It took software developers a couple years to upgrade their software, but, you could still run 16 bit apps on the new OS.

 

What I'm talking about is the features that come as part of widows, you look through the help files in XP, a lot of things say "Not available in 64-bit", shouldnt MS have made sure these were ALREADY available before they released the 64-bit version?

 

Are there any other OSs that can run 64 bit processors? If there aren't, Microsoft really wouldn't mind too much if they released more bits and pieces of WinXP 64 because its in control of the market anyway.

 

Suse and Mandrake have a x86/64 port.

 

oh, ok. Didn't know that.

Oh yea, by the way, from the previous posts, I sense that there are more people in support of AMD than Intel. I was just wondering why this was the case? What makes AMD stand out more than Intel?

 

Lots of reasons. Firstly, everyone likes rooting for the underdog. They are the underdog (some would say) in this situation, Intel is far larger. AMD also has alot of fanboys, people who would sell their kid before admitting AMD is wrong.

AMD is usually (on the desktop market) cheaper than the equivalent Intel. And some lower AMD processors have been known to higher end Intel (famous one was the Duron and the Celeron, where much lowr Duron's outperformed higher Celeron)

AMD has the feature of (usually) leaving their chips able to be unlocked easily. This appeals to overclockers and enthusiasts.

Lastly, AMD chips usually run hotter than Intel, which is another reason why they are cheaper.

 

kool! I've never actually liked AMD a lot (probably because I've been one of those Intel=Microsoft people). That little bit of insight into AMD was really great!

 

I use them both. AMD as desktop and Intel as servers.

 

No kidding about AMD running hot! I raised the temp in a closed dorm room 10F with my Athlon Thunderbird over the course of just one day. Thank goodness for the thermal alarm in my fanbus.

 

This is nice, but I see no reference to it at all on the microsoft site, the only things I could find were about Itanium and Win 64 XP. There is NO mention of AMD anywhere, if anyone has a link to it, please post it.

 

man, what do you have against excaliber

[edit] ok the post is gone nevermind [/edit]