From
http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWS2000/guide/platform/strategic/64bit.asp
"The 64-bit Windows platform will bring the following benefits to the developers and end users:
* The full advantage of IA-64's reliable, high- performance, and high-availability architecture.
* Compatibility with Windows 2000-based applications and existing 32-bit applications.
* API-level compatibility between the Win64TM API and the Win32® API.
* Scalability of virtual memory up to 16 terabytes (TB).
* Interoperability with systems based on existing 32-bit architectures."
64-bit Windows uses IA-64 only. This is Intel's instruction set. Microsoft currently has no plans to support AMD's 64-bit instruction set. (If you can call it that. It's just a hack extension to the 32-bit instruction set.)
"As long as it runs the same apps no one cares what architecture is used"
That's really the point. It won't run the same apps. Not any more than a Mac can run PC software.
"Its going to be the same situation that we have now with the P3, Athalon"
Not at all. Both of these processors run the same base x86 instruction set. They both run the same 80386-compatible instruction set. They both have a few extra instructions that are mutually exclusive of one another (for example, SSE and 3DNow) that are used in plugins, drivers, and specially designed apps. The Windows operating system however does not use these extra instructions, so it's completely compatible with the P3, P4, and Athlon.
64-bit Windows is another story entirely. It's built to target IA-64 only. What this means is any CPU that does not use the IA-64 instruction set will not be able to run it at all.
"Numerous companies don't want to support Windoz 64 so they are developing Linux functionality, IBM and SGI are hot on the Linux bandwagon."
I hope you have fun being restricted to only running Linux and older versions of Windows (32-bit versions) on your 64-bit AMD machine.
-Raystonn
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =