Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-20 Thread David Fox
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:45 PM, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But that's approximately 2**34 gigabytes, and the lowest > price-per-gigabyte that I can find for RAM chips is about $20. So to > max out a 64-bit memory space, you would need to spend around > > $343,597,383,680 A

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-19 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 07:14:43PM -0700, Daniel Burrows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > The good news is that if you have a 64-bit processor, the > amount of memory you can install is limited only by the amount your > motherboard can recognize. Also, memory is super-cheap nowadays. So

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-19 Thread Ted Hilts
Daniel Burrows wrote: On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 02:03:57PM -0600, Ted Hilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: [snipped -- please don't repeat long emails if you're just responding to one part] Also, recently, I discovered that a dual or quad CPU board only provides load balancin

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Jos Collin
> (Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible > versions). This requires some workaround but is generally manageable; > software that is not available in 64-bit versions will usually just be > run in 32-bit compatibility mode. This is true. Flash is not yet released in 64-bit co

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Daniel Burrows
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 02:03:57PM -0600, Ted Hilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: [snipped -- please don't repeat long emails if you're just responding to one part] > Also, recently, I discovered that a dual or quad CPU board only > provides load balancing and not greater speed

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Alex Samad
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:13:29PM +0100, Nuno Magalhães wrote: > «(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible > versions)» browser plugins > > Huh? I'm using Java (Eclipse) and flash (mozilla) on 2.6.18-6-amd64... > > -- > Nuno Magalhães -- "A dictatorship would be a heck of

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Jeff Soules
So am I -- thought that was via a compatibility layer, though? I know I'm running Adobe's flash player, which has not been released in a 64-bit version, on my 64-bit box here... On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:13 PM, Nuno Magalhães <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > «(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released i

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Nuno Magalhães
«(Java, Flash, etc. are not yet released in 64-bit compatible versions)» Huh? I'm using Java (Eclipse) and flash (mozilla) on 2.6.18-6-amd64... -- Nuno Magalhães

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Shachar Or
On Monday 18 August 2008 23:03, Ted Hilts wrote: > Jeff Soules wrote: > > AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a > > "second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been > > producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture > > (i.e. they us

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Jeff Soules
Hi Ted, Thanks for clarifying -- hopefully that'll give the wiser heads around here a bit more of a lead on how to help you. I've done a little bit of research into virtualization, but only just scratching the surface, and nothing on the level that you're describing--it sounds like you'll have a

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Ted Hilts
Jeff Soules wrote: AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a "second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture (i.e. they use the same instruction set). (See: AMD: http://en.wikipedia.org/

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Ted Hilts
Kent West wrote: Ted Hilts wrote: Can someone enlighten me regarding my confusion with the term AMD. 1, I know that the term AMD (American Micro Devices) is supposed to be a 'second source' for Intel 32bit and 64bit microprocessors. You're incorrect. They're two totally different chip

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Jeff Soules
AMD is a chip manufacturer. They started out (~20 years ago) as a "second source" for 286 processors, but since then they have been producing independently-designed chips within the x86 architecture (i.e. they use the same instruction set). (See: AMD: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD x86 architec

Re: debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Kent West
Ted Hilts wrote: > Can someone enlighten me regarding my confusion with the term AMD. > > 1, I know that the term AMD (American Micro Devices) is supposed to be > a 'second source' for Intel 32bit and 64bit microprocessors. You're incorrect. They're two totally different chips, which are mostly co

debian-user] Re: AMD vs Intel and the Debian kernel

2008-08-18 Thread Ted Hilts
Can someone enlighten me regarding my confusion with the term AMD. 1, I know that the term AMD (American Micro Devices) is supposed to be a 'second source' for Intel 32bit and 64bit microprocessors. But it seems based on what I have read on this relationship between AMD and Intel that there i