On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 01:34:37PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote: > > <quote from previous mail in debian-release> > > - Use win32 + PAE. This allows your program to run in the vast majority > > of computers, and provides the biggest profit in the short term. I hope > > this approach will be the most common, and expect it'll sustained for > > long. > > Limited to 2 or 3GB ram per application, even though the system itself can > have more than 4GB ram. Hardly a solution for a lot of applications.
You forgot the "+PAE" part. > > - Use a 64-bit platform. Which one? > > - win64 is so utterly broken that none of the former win32 users wanted > > to migrate. As a consequence, there's practicaly no userbase. > > Actually I wouldn't say win64 is broken, it just has a serious lack of > drivers, which of course will continue as long as nobody is using it. > If microsoft wanted to solve this they should mandate 64bit drivers > along with 32bit drivers in order to certify a driver for vista. They do that already, but it doesn't work for a lot of hardware: - old hardware that was already sold, and for which the vendor may not even exist anymore. - hardware from small vendors that can't afford the cost of certification. The truth is, that there's a huge mass of unsupported hardware out there, and nobody in the win* userbase is pushing for 64-bit drivers since they all use win32. Vendors just don't care unless MS forces them. And even if they're forced, they have no genuine interest in high-quality drivers, which may result in unstability, etc. The fact that Microsoft has chosen to remove win64 completely from the retail boxes for Vista is very significative. > > Those who go the PAE way are totaly irrelevant. Someone (including > > microsoft) > > is going to make a lot of profit exploiting the decadent 32-bit + pae > > market, > > but sooner or later it'll collapse. > > > > Those who go the "clean" 64-bit way will have to make a choice to determine > > which will be the dominant OS on this new platform. Their main concern will > > be (as always has been) userbase. If our userbase is bigger than win64's > > (and that's not too hard), x86_64-linux-gnu will be stablished as the > > standard > > system and the gradual replacement of 32-bit hardware will render microsoft > > obsolete. > > </quote> > > Well just because hardware is 64bit capable doesn't make it not 32bit > capable, so obsolete may be too strong a word. It doesn't really matter. If we win the 64bit battle, when microsoft wants to migrate to 64-bit, they'll find that this niche is already occupied, and that the reference API is another one. Then they can clone us if they want to try something :-) > > This date is easily predictable. There won't be a "big" migration at that > > time, but the decision of which will be the reference 64-bit platform will > > be taken and set in stone. After that, it doesn't matter how long it takes > > this new platform to replace win32, if this platform is ours, we've already > > won. > > Except the win64 platform does run win32 software, and backwards > compatiblity has always won for some stupid reason. Yes. And we're backwards compatible (wine can run win32 binaries) too. The real problem is, can they be compatible with x86_64-linux-gnu api ? > I just want a flash plugin that doesn't crash firefox all the time (so > that pretty much means it can't be written by adobe obviously). We'll surely have that for lenny. :-) -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
