From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262222AbUBXK7O (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 05:59:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262221AbUBXK7O (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 05:59:14 -0500 Received: from host213-160-108-25.dsl.vispa.com ([213.160.108.25]:39601 "HELO cenedra.office") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262222AbUBXK7N (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Feb 2004 05:59:13 -0500 From: Andrew Walrond To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Intel vs AMD x86-64 Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 10:59:07 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.4 References: <20040223170336.GK5499@fs.tum.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200402241059.07848.andrew@walrond.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 23 Feb 2004 5:31 pm, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > The x86 is so great partly because there's been real competition. So I > think it's very important to x86-64 to have real competition to make sure > nobody gets too dishonest. I think linux's support for so many architectures is important in this respect. I can now compare and choose between several distinct architectures, rather than just different flavour of x86. That's where the real competition will be long-term. (indeed, I would probably buy ia64 if not for the fact that I can put together 5 opteron systems for the price of 1 ia64...) I'm don't usually subscribe to conspiracy theories, but I've got this really nasty suspicion that intel really did conspire with microsoft to delay win64 until their x86-64 chip was ready. The more influential linux becomes, the easier it will become for amd et al to compete, and relegate this sort of bullshit to then past, where it belongs. And competition means faster/better/cheaper processors, which is what I care about. Andrew Walrond