Intel renames EM64T (again)

  • Thread starter Thread starter YKhan
  • Start date Start date
Pretty silly, eh? I'm just happy/relieved that they didn't do
something REALLY stupid (i.e. develop their own, non-compatible X86-64
ISA)
Click to expand...

BillyG told them to forget that idea. They had WinBlows for IA-64
and that was all they were getting.
 
chrisv said:
Pretty silly, eh? I'm just happy/relieved that they didn't do
something REALLY stupid (i.e. develop their own, non-compatible X86-64
ISA)
Click to expand...

I'd say it's pretty significant: it makes the name of their AMD64
clone more prominently "Intel" than IA-64 is. I think I can just
barely see the tip of the bow through the bubbles...
 
Joe said:
I'd say it's pretty significant: it makes the name of their AMD64
clone more prominently "Intel" than IA-64 is. I think I can just
barely see the tip of the bow through the bubbles...
Click to expand...

With all of the name changes that Intel is putting to it, it's virtually
guaranteed that no programming language is ever going to put a directive
in called "Intel 64", or any of the other previous names they came up
with: EM64T, and IA-32E. They're just likely going to stick to AMD64,
x86-64, or x64.

Yousuf Khan
 
With all of the name changes that Intel is putting to it, it's virtually
guaranteed that no programming language is ever going to put a directive
in called "Intel 64", or any of the other previous names they came up
with: EM64T, and IA-32E. They're just likely going to stick to AMD64,
x86-64, or x64.

Yousuf Khan
Click to expand...

Does it really matter? Looks like pure marketeering and no real
substance. Also reminds the attempts to copyright the letter 'i' and
the numbers x86 (386, 486, and all the way up).

NNN
 
Yousuf Khan said:
With all of the name changes that Intel is putting to it, it's
virtually guaranteed that no programming language is ever going to put
a directive in called "Intel 64", or any of the other previous names
they came up with: EM64T, and IA-32E. They're just likely going to
stick to AMD64, x86-64, or x64.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a safe bet. What I saw as significant is yet another sign
that Itanic is on its way to the bottom.
 
Does it really matter? Looks like pure marketeering and no real
substance. Also reminds the attempts to copyright the letter 'i' and
the numbers x86 (386, 486, and all the way up).
Click to expand...

I'd guess it's their "clever" plot to take back the initiative, in
conjunction with SSE4... and all the wonderful things it'll do for us.:-)
 
Joe said:
I'd say it's pretty significant: it makes the name of their AMD64
clone more prominently "Intel" than IA-64 is. I think I can just
barely see the tip of the bow through the bubbles...
Click to expand...

Well, IA64 is the Itanium, so they couldn't use that.

I'm not so sure that X86-64 even needs a "marketing" name anymore,
since it's becoming a standard feature...
 
Back
Top