On 10/1/2012 2:02 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote: > Agreed, if you where going to change the name, x86-64 makes the most > sense, is the most common name for it in the Linux community (MS users > tend to use x64, which is absurd), and is technically accurate.
Actually, x86-64 is no longer technically accurate. AMD renamed the architecture from x86-64 to AMD64 to brand it, much to my chagrin. Currently, "AMD64" is the technically accurate name of the ISA. AMD deprecated "x86-64". Please read my post which stated why both the AMD64 and IA64 port names must be changed simultaneously for any renaming of ports to effect the desired result, which is eliminating confusion amongst new/lazy users. Changing AMD64 in isolation will do nothing to un-confuse new users when they see "IA64" in the ports list. Anyone not in the know will instantly think that means "Intel and AMD 64 bit CPU". This is sufficiently confusing to many users, who apparently don't read the descriptions, that they feel the need to ask on this list for clarification. Again, renaming "IA64" to "Itanium" and "AMD64" to "amdintel64", or similar, would instantly fix the confusion. Why? IA64 would no longer exist to confuse people, and of the other port choices, "amdintel64" would simply make sense, because the person downloading the distro knows his/her CPU is an AMD 64 bit CPU, or an Intel 64 bit CPU, because this information is on the processor box or computer system. The names of the ISAs the chips support is NOT on the box or the computer system. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/506bcb13.9040...@hardwarefreak.com
