Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #233123

Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems

From Celejar <celejar@gmail.com>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems
Date 2021-03-15 18:40 +0100
Message-ID <BSZm9-JM-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <BSBa9-2Rj-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <BSYq5-7S-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 12:39:10 -0400
Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> wrote:

...

> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 09:15:10AM +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:
> >Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> >> The IA64 architecture was a resounding success in one area tho: it
> >> killed most of the competition that was coming from "above" (at least
> >> DEC's Alpha, SGI's MIPS, HP's PA, and it likely sped up the demise of
> >> Sun's SPARC, I don't think it had much impact on POWER or PowerPC,
> >> OTOH) and thus helped open up the server (and supercomputer) market
> >> for Intel (and AMD).
> >
> >I think, IBM is big enough and old enough and established enough with
> >POWER that a "young whippersnapper" like Intel is no real danger to them
> >in their own enclosed Mainframe walled garden. I believe Apple moving
> >away from PowerPC did more damage to IBMs aspirations in that market.
> 
> IBM didn't want to just be a mainframe manufacturer, they really wanted 
> to amortize the costs for those CPUs against multiple product lines. 
> They actually made a good number of high end computing sales for a few 
> years by being the only player left standing, until amd64 just became 
> too compelling. They still have some very large deployments, but their 
> overall market share is not what they'd hoped for.

Apparently POWER is having a bit of a resurgence lately due to its
openness and non-x86ness:

https://www.osnews.com/story/133093/review-blackbird-secure-desktop-a-fully-open-source-modern-power9-workstation-without-any-proprietary-code/

Of course, Raptor seems to be a tiny player, and it's hard to see how
they'll get any traction since the pricing isn't very competitive,
apparently at least in part due to the chicken-and-egg market share
problem, but it's an exciting development to watch.

Celejar

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems "Susmita/Rajib" <bkpsusmitaa@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 12:10 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and  as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2021-03-14 12:30 +0100
    Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-03-14 12:40 +0100
      Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-03-14 16:50 +0100
    Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 12:50 +0100
      Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-14 15:00 +0100
        [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-14 20:20 +0100
          Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-15 09:20 +0100
            Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 10:10 +0100
              Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-15 11:20 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 12:10 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-15 12:40 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 13:00 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems IL Ka <kazakevichilya@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 13:20 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2021-03-15 14:00 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-03-15 15:00 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-03-15 17:50 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-03-15 19:20 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-15 20:30 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 16:10 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-15 20:30 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 22:50 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems Christian Groessler <chris@groessler.org> - 2021-03-15 23:20 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-16 08:20 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-03-15 14:40 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 15:00 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 15:10 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2021-03-15 15:10 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-03-15 15:10 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-15 15:50 +0100
                Re: [EVEN MORE OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as  i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are  also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-15 16:00 +0100
            Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-15 16:10 +0100
              Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 17:50 +0100
              Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de> - 2021-03-15 20:40 +0100
                Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-15 20:50 +0100
                Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2021-03-15 22:00 +0100
                Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-15 22:30 +0100
                Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 23:10 +0100
                Re: [TOTALLY OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386  for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also  64bit systems Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-16 00:10 +0100
            Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 17:40 +0100
              Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-03-15 18:00 +0100
                Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 18:20 +0100
                Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2021-03-15 18:50 +0100
              Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and  as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 18:40 +0100
                Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 20:10 +0100
              Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-15 21:00 +0100
                Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 22:10 +0100
          Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 09:50 +0100
            Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-15 16:30 +0100
              Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-15 17:40 +0100
              Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 23:10 +0100
                Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Roberto C. Sánchez <roberto@debian.org> - 2021-03-15 23:20 +0100
                Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-16 09:20 +0100
    Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Cmdte Alpha Tigre Z <santiagopinth@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 03:30 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 12:30 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Eduardo M KALINOWSKI <eduardo@kalinowski.com.br> - 2021-03-14 12:30 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 12:40 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Peter Ehlert <peter@sdi-baja.com> - 2021-03-14 12:50 +0100
    Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2021-03-14 13:00 +0100
      [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2021-03-14 20:00 +0100
        Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Nicholas Geovanis <nickgeovanis@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 17:30 +0100
          Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-16 13:30 +0100
            Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a  32-bit PC, and as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit  systems Martin Smith <tech@smithproductions.co.uk> - 2021-03-16 14:30 +0100
  Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and  as amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems songbird <songbird@anthive.com> - 2021-03-14 13:20 +0100
  [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems "Susmita/Rajib" <bkpsusmitaa@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 13:40 +0100
    Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems "Susmita/Rajib" <bkpsusmitaa@gmail.com> - 2021-03-14 15:20 +0100
      [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems "Susmita/Rajib" <bkpsusmitaa@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 05:10 +0100
        Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2021-03-15 11:50 +0100
        Re: [?] Why should Distros be called as i386 for a 32-bit PC, and as  amd64 for a 64-bit PC, when Intel Core PCs are also 64bit systems Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2021-03-15 14:40 +0100

csiph-web