• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= (10/10) Apr 26 2005 In the news:
• Ben Hinkle (3/8) Apr 26 2005 I guess x86 is now 86-bit computing. ;-)
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= (5/8) Apr 26 2005 Or maybe it works with a Intel 364 CPU ? :-)

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

In the news:
"At WinHEC 2005, Microsoft announced it is finally ready to bring 64-bit
computing to the mainstream and is shipping x64 editions of Windows XP
and Windows Server 2003."

So at Redmond, X86_64 has now been "shortened" to x64... (same thing)

Argh,
--anders

PS.
That's just as great as JDK 1.5 being renamed by Sun as JDK 5.0, to
"reflect the level of maturity, stability, scalability and security"

"Ben Hinkle" <ben.hinkle gmail.com> writes:

"Anders F Björklund" <afb algonet.se> wrote in message 
news:d4kpe1$p1b$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In the news:
 "At WinHEC 2005, Microsoft announced it is finally ready to bring 64-bit
 computing to the mainstream and is shipping x64 editions of Windows XP
 and Windows Server 2003."

 So at Redmond, X86_64 has now been "shortened" to x64... (same thing)

I guess x86 is now 86-bit computing. ;-) 

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Ben Hinkle wrote:

So at Redmond, X86_64 has now been "shortened" to x64... (same thing)

 
 I guess x86 is now 86-bit computing. ;-) 

Or maybe it works with a Intel 364 CPU ? :-)

I just thought it funny/sad since Walter just changed to X86_64...
Anyway, it still means the same thing - whatever the name-du-jour.

--anders