Now officially in the Quad-Core era

[K404]

No longer ES, available in stores.

Still programming holds progress back.

Despite the fact that from a hardware point of view, the last few years have provided the same shocks in terms of advances, the hardware developers have coped better for allowing available technology to work.

 

[maverik-sg1]

mmmm I understand exactly where you are coming from in all this.

More disappointing that 64bit computing has been available to use in terms of hardware since 2002 and yet even with the event that is Vista we still see a divide between 32 and 64bit computing.

64bit OS AFAIK is still not backward compatable with 32bit apps - so a 64bit environment still means 64bit only software 5 years after 64bit processing hardware became available to the mainstream.

How or why this was not developed to be backward compatable I will never really understand or indeed 64 bit extensions that can be progremmed to run in a 32bit environment - providing the processing power is there.

As exciting as real multithreading is in a quad core environment is, I would be happy for 64bit extensions to run in harmony with 32bit systems that have 64bit hardware.

VISTA= biggest disapointment of 2007 thus far, quad core and VISTA shows once again a sign that hardware manufacturers and software developers never talk to each other....... once again teh consumer loses out on added value to their purchases.

 

[maverik-sg1]

After writing the above I had a thought.

if you have a 64bit dual core cpu and u can multithread the cores - why not multithread the bits? We all no as it stands you need to have either 64bit or 32bit apps. Why not make the idle 32bits of a 64bit cpu in a 32bit environment a virtual 32bit sub processor? Maybe HT the way its meant to be made?

 

[Animal]

Microsoft made a big mistake releasing a 32bit version of vista, they could of moved us all over to 64bit and there wouldnt be drivers issues...

 

[unreal]

Microsoft made a big mistake releasing a 32bit version of vista, they could of moved us all over to 64bit and there wouldnt be drivers issues...

I think they should have made all versions 64bit, and then just the cheapo cheapo Vista being 32bit.. That would have made sense...

 

[stocky]

I agree with the above. They're meant to be releasing a final version of XP (SP3) which would cater for all the 32bit folks, or the lowest version of Vista maybe as 32bit would have been good planning.

They probably want everyone to go Vista for all that rights protection stuff, as I imagine that's where they'll be making some $$$

 

[unreal]

I agree with the above. They're meant to be releasing a final version of XP (SP3) which would cater for all the 32bit folks, or the lowest version of Vista maybe as 32bit would have been good planning.

They probably want everyone to go Vista for all that rights protection stuff, as I imagine that's where they'll be making some $$$

Not as much as I thought they might, Vista is competitively priced! (to say there is no competition... well I mean the top end Vista costs the same as Mac OS X)

 

[Master_G]

IMO we wont enter the quad-core "era" until we can actually use those cores, at the moment they seem totally pointless to me (in my computer usage) and probably 99% of the joe six-packs with computers out there.

The HL2 multi-core update due for release this year will help to bring in the era, but i see 2007 as a bit of a non-year for me in computing terms, maybe buy a 939 X2 to replace my 3500+ and then that should be fast enough until the end of the year.

Will just watch how Vista pans out with 32 vrs 64bit, and how the pricing changes, as it is shocking atm frankly, and see how the multi-core HL2 update actually changes things.

G