128 bit desktop cpu's on their way

[deadrats]

how do i know? check out this article:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-128bit-next-generation,8827.html

they wouldn't be working on a 128 bit windows if there weren't going to be any 128 bit cpu's to run the thing. perhaps the most surprising is that windows 7 has barely been released and not only is microsoft already working on windows 8 but they are working on windows 9 already, which leads me to the obvious question:

why bother with windows 8 if 9 is already in the works?!? this is what i hate about these big corporations, their entire business model is on shafting their customers, they release a product just so they can release a "new" one a year later when they already had the "new" version all along.

what pisses me off even more is that one has to assume that microsoft has access to engineering samples of 128 bit cpu's already with with to develop and test their software which means that amd and/or intel already had working 128 bit chips yet we are still seeing them slowly trickle new products to maintain their forced upgrade business model.

they all suck!!!

[MOVIEGEEK]

What's the point when support for 64bit programs isn't very good?

[racer-x]

No one says you HAVE TO UPGRADE. They are counting on everyone's exuberance to boost their profit margin. 64-bit is only borderline improvement. I only have about 3 programs that actually see a differance..........

Lot's of marketing hype......that's what I see.

[Noahtuck]

Yeah, so far i'm not really impressed with vista ultimate 64bit.

[rallynavvie]

No one says you HAVE TO UPGRADE. They are counting on everyone's exuberance to boost their profit margin. 64-bit is only borderline improvement. I only have about 3 programs that actually see a differance..........

Lot's of marketing hype......that's what I see.

I've been saying this ever since the Athlon64 came out all those years ago and it's still true today

[jagabo]

perhaps the most surprising is that windows 7 has barely been released and not only is microsoft already working on windows 8 but they are working on windows 9 already

Three generations of overlapping development has always been the case at Microsoft. Any big software company, really.

[edDV]

Why do people rush to the latest rather than pick a problem to solve?

Seems like most aren't doing anything. If you do something, you run into problems that need a solution.

[edDV]

what pisses me off even more is that one has to assume that microsoft has access to engineering samples of 128 bit cpu's already with with to develop and test their software which means that amd and/or intel already had working 128 bit chips yet we are still seeing them slowly trickle new products to maintain their forced upgrade business model.

They can simulate a 128 bit CPU in software or fake it with 64 bit hardware.

Why does this concern you? You want them to stop developing just so you don't need to upgrade?

I'm sure they were developing the first 128 bit solutions for an application which doesn't interest you. Are you a trunk server or into realtime visual database analysis or something?

Why get angry about things unrelated to you?

[johns0]

I find vista 64 better than winxp since all the drivers and newest programs run great,going to 128bit is something will force people to go to 64bit faster,took awhile for the 16bit to 32bit transition where lots of people cried about the upgrade and not as reliable claims of win3.1 to win95.

[jman98]

edDV is quite right. Preparing for 128 bit support is not all that difficult for a major software developer to do. It will probably take years before Windows is ready for 128 bit and probably years before such CPUs are available. I can just see most consumers asking "Why do I need this?" at this time.

[ocgw]

how do i know? check out this article:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-128bit-next-generation,8827.html

they wouldn't be working on a 128 bit windows if there weren't going to be any 128 bit cpu's to run the thing. perhaps the most surprising is that windows 7 has barely been released and not only is microsoft already working on windows 8 but they are working on windows 9 already, which leads me to the obvious question:

why bother with windows 8 if 9 is already in the works?!? this is what i hate about these big corporations, their entire business model is on shafting their customers, they release a product just so they can release a "new" one a year later when they already had the "new" version all along.

what pisses me off even more is that one has to assume that microsoft has access to engineering samples of 128 bit cpu's already with with to develop and test their software which means that amd and/or intel already had working 128 bit chips yet we are still seeing them slowly trickle new products to maintain their forced upgrade business model.

they all suck!!!

Prototype development programs running concurrently @ different stages of development years in advance is normal and necessary for proper testing for compatability and reliability

I am in the Automotive Engineering field, not software development, in my line of business it used to take us 3 years to go from concept to launch, we have got that down to 18-24 months to remain competitive w/ the Japanese, so we are working on 2012 model year vehicles when we haven't even started selling 2011's yet

ocgw

peace

[JohnnyMalaria]

why bother with windows 8 if 9 is already in the works?!? this is what i hate about these big corporations, their entire business model is on shafting their customers, they release a product just so they can release a "new" one a year later when they already had the "new" version all along.

So you'd prefer to post to VideoHelp using a teletypewriter and a modem with big rubber cups, presumably.

Let's just stop all further incarnations of all OSes until someone with a shed load of money independently perfects quantum electronics and, out of the blue, markets it. Anything in between would just be greed.

Every single piece of electronics you have is what it is because of competition. If you don't like that, get two tin cans (not the modern aluminum rubbish) and a short bit of string (made from horse tail hair, not nasty modern polymers). Stick one can to your mouth, the other to your ear, pull the string tight and then shout. You'll be the only one to hear you yell 'wah, wah'.

Sheesh.

[rallynavvie]

I work in software development now and understand why you can't just have it all at once. It's something called scope creep, and those in project management will certainly side with me on this one. I'd have to write out an overview of the SDLC in order for it to make sense but essentially if you keep adding new features to a build it will never get done and will have cost assloads of money for something that never gets released.

[Dv8ted2]

how do i know? check out this article:

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-128bit-next-generation,8827.html

they wouldn't be working on a 128 bit windows if there weren't going to be any 128 bit cpu's to run the thing. perhaps the most surprising is that windows 7 has barely been released and not only is microsoft already working on windows 8 but they are working on windows 9 already, which leads me to the obvious question:

why bother with windows 8 if 9 is already in the works?!? this is what i hate about these big corporations, their entire business model is on shafting their customers, they release a product just so they can release a "new" one a year later when they already had the "new" version all along.

This is standard upon software developers. They are usually one or two versions ahead of what is released. This is out of necessity. If you support a product for too long, it gets stagnant. The purpose is to release new product and make money.

Technology moves forward at a blistering pace. I look forward to the upcoming advances.

[greymalkin]

I work in software development now and understand why you can't just have it all at once. It's something called scope creep, and those in project management will certainly side with me on this one. I'd have to write out an overview of the SDLC in order for it to make sense but essentially if you keep adding new features to a build it will never get done and will have cost assloads of money for something that never gets released.

SDLC: Software Development Life Cycle (If people don't know what it is they proabably won't know the acryonym you are using :P )