Microsoft says Intel’s Windows 8 Statements Were ''Factually Inaccurate and Unfo

[Marcus Yam]

Stinger!

Microsoft says Intel’s Windows 8 Statements Were ''Factually Inaccurate and Unfortunately Misleading'' : Read more

 

[apache_lives]

Microsoft: Its Not Not True

LOL

 

[billj214]

Would have been better for Microsoft to ask Intel to clarify, this sounds like a bunch of kids fighting and not two large corporations!
This still doesn't change the fact that what Intel said is correct but just not all the details!
Yes Windows 8 will work, maybe not as efficiently as x86!

 

[Raid3r]

HAHA since when were they "adults"?

 

[JOSHSKORN]

32-bit needs to die already with Windows 7. It should've died with Vista.

 

[Assmar]

[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]32-bit needs to die already with Windows 7. It should've died with Vista.[/citation]
It shouldn't have been an option at all with Vista. Nip it in the bud, nahmean? The RAM demands of Vista should have triggered some moral or ethical issues at MS with that one.

 

[randomizer]

You are wrong but we can't tell you why. Guilty until proven guilty?

 

[mrmez]

So...... Intel is wrong because M$ have no idea how W8 will work.

Sounds fair.

 

[back_by_demand]

[citation][nom]mrmez[/nom]So...... Intel is wrong because Intel have no idea how W8 will work[/citation]
Fixed that for ya!

 

[bv90andy]

MS should just have said that they won't comment.
Although when MS presented it they said that it is the same thing and a "full windows experience"

 

[cyb34]

"...there'll be no issue."

That's why.
Sounds like a guarantee Microsoft is not ready to offer right now.

 

[jojesa]

Doesn't factually inaccurate = accurate?

 

[reggieray]

I don't know who lies more, government or MS. Well with Obozo it's government, i meant a respectable government who is not out to destroy the USA or Israel.

 

[osserc]

I'm inclined to agree with you Reggie, but to be fair, what is the MS lie here?

All I see is that MS hasn't finalized how Win8 will work on ARM, and they don't want bad info out there. It may turn out that Intel is right, but you never know what breakthroughs will happen between now and Win8 launch.

 

[godnodog]

[citation][nom]ReggieRay[/nom]I don't know who lies more, government or MS. Well with Obozo it's government, i meant a respectable government who is not out to destroy the USA or Israel.[/citation]
So...., what´s your opinion on Bush administration?

 

[hixbot]

[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]32-bit needs to die already with Windows 7. It should've died with Vista.[/citation]
Are you mad? Do you know how many 32bit CPUs are in use right now? Why would MS ignore 32bit hardware and all those sales? I'm running Windows 7 32bit on a Pentium 4. Performance is great. If you had your way, I'd be stuck on XP.

 

[milktea]

The long term partnership between the two giants, Intel and M$, goes down the drain...
The future of x86 is on shaky ground.

 

[hellwig]

[citation][nom]hixbot[/nom]Are you mad? Do you know how many 32bit CPUs are in use right now? Why would MS ignore 32bit hardware and all those sales? I'm running Windows 7 32bit on a Pentium 4. Performance is great. If you had your way, I'd be stuck on XP.[/citation]
Did you ever run Vista on that machine? If Microsoft had set the bar earlier, you wouldn't be talking about Win7 on your P4.

I agree Microsoft, a software vendor, would be foolish to ignore 32-bit processors. Still, it's more Intel's fault for continuing to produce 32-bit processors so long after the 64-bit technology existed (maybe they were upset Microsoft chose AMD's implementation?).

I think Microsoft could have easily shifted the market to 64-bit, if Intel would have played along. If Intel had simply been including 64-bit in most of their processors like AMD was, Intel would have happily done so (you think Intel gives a crap about your 32-bit P4, they already got your money for that processor). Remember how Microsoft had to revise their Vista-Ready/Vista-Capable marketing because Intel's GMA chipsets didn't have the graphics power to drive the Aero interface (led to a lawsuit if I recall)? Intel (and OEMs like HP) moaned and complained that too many of their offerings wouldn't be Vista-Ready, so Microsoft created Vista-Capable, and Intel was able to continue selling the 5-year old crap they couldn't bother to modernize. Imagine the uproar from Intel if Microsoft had necessitated 64-bit processors on top of that!

 

[lewbaseball07]

My load is very compatible with faces...

 

[SteelCity1981]

LOL Microsoft to Intel "Since that statement your crappy Intel Atoms will no longer be supported in Windows 8. Instead we will now only support micro processors that can acutally perform decently." LOL

 

[f-14]

ha, microsoft doesn't want to make drivers for arm. it's like telling the ceo to get off the golf cart and do some work.

 

[memadmax]

Guys, the shift to 64bit has more to do with grandma's computer than anything else. If most of the grandma's puters out there are still running Pentium 3's, well, we have to wait till those go away....

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]assmar[/nom]The RAM demands of Vista should have triggered some moral or ethical issues at MS with that one.[/citation]

tell that to the computer manufacturers who sold computers with just 128MB of ram which barley ran Windows XP

 

[captaincharisma]

[citation][nom]hixbot[/nom]Are you mad? Do you know how many 32bit CPUs are in use right now? Why would MS ignore 32bit hardware and all those sales? I'm running Windows 7 32bit on a Pentium 4. Performance is great. If you had your way, I'd be stuck on XP.[/citation]

you mean there are still 32-bit computers out there that can really run the latest software and hardware?

 

[dread_cthulhu]

Please... Please... kill 32bit... the transition has been going on long enough now!