login
Header Space

 
 

Quote: People Who Live On The Edge

June 20, 2008 - 10:13am
Submitted by Jeremy on June 20, 2008 - 10:13am.

"I'd have assumed that 64-bit is starting to be the norm for people who live on the edge, but perhaps I'm just out of touch?"

— Linus Torvalds, in a June 19th, 2008 message on the Linux Kernel mailing list.

I don't know

June 20, 2008 - 2:52pm
Todd Millecam (not verified)

I'd prefer to think of 64-bit for people who dream of a better world.

I think you missed the point

June 20, 2008 - 9:59pm

Linus wasn't saying that 64-bit is unusual, but rather that 32-bit is so passé and pedestrian that the bleeding edge users long since left it, and there are no (or very few) bleeding edge users using 32-bit i686 to try strange and wonderful combinations of settings.

His statement wasn't an indictment of 64-bit as being "new and unusual" so much as a statement about 32-bit i686 being waaay too uninteresting for the tinkerer crowd.

Even the embedded x86 crowd has 64-bit CPUs to play with now, so even those folks don't necessarily have to stay on 32-bit....

--
Program Intellivision and play Space Patrol!

out of touch

June 20, 2008 - 8:51pm
Anonymouse (not verified)

Yeah, I'd definitely vote that Linus is out of touch. On the other hand, most x86 class machines out there still run 32-bit software even though they're on AMD64/EMT64 CPUs. I blame that on an inferior OS wannabe. Come on - I've been using 64-bit machines since 1994 and other people have been using them for longer; it's hardly "the edge", it's more a case of a lot of the world being backward. The 64-bit data (wide wide) word goes back to ~1961. The >32bit addressing was a much later development; with the cost of RAM even in the mid-1970's, enormous RAM was just not economical - we're talking from 10's of M (late 1970s) up to billions of $$ per GB (early 1970s). Anyone know of a multi-billion $ supercomputer from that era?

Read his comment again,

June 21, 2008 - 5:11pm
Anonymous (not verified)

Read his comment again, please, you've got it backwards.

Rather than bigger physical

June 23, 2008 - 10:16am

Rather than bigger physical and virtual address space, really useful for processes that need to allocate about > 4 GiB of memory (and can drive to slight decrease of performance since math on 64 bit addresses is slower), the switch to x86-64 also doubles the general purpose and mmx registers, and here comes the major performance increase. It was not the case of SPARC, where SUN suggested 32-bit for particular binaries since they could be faster than 64 bit counterparts (and no additional features apart larger address space) nor the Alpha of cource since they never deployed a 32 bit version.

Alpha

June 28, 2008 - 5:14am
Lawrence D'Oliveiro (not verified)

Alpha could run code in a 32-bit "TASO" (Truncated Address Space Option) mode. Dimdows NT for Alpha was only 32-bit.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
speck-geostationary