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


Groups > linux.debian.user > #233093

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

From Sven Hartge <sven@svenhartge.de>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject 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
Date 2021-03-15 11:20 +0100
Message-ID <BSSul-56y-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (2 earlier) <BSxpT-Dy-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BSzrH-1Ne-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <BSErn-4Vt-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <BSQCd-3Z3-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <BSRoC-4uu-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization Newsfeed am Wurmloch

Show all headers | View raw


tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 09:15:10AM +0100, Sven Hartge wrote:

>> For the others: they where either on board from the start (like HP),
>> where already dead (like DEC/Compaq) or slipping into the embedded
>> market (like MIPS).

> MIPS had its chance to become the unified architecture for high-end
> workstations [1]. Until it was bought up by Silicon Graphics (SGI).
> Which, on the one hand was bitterly needed by MIPS, because they
> needed that cash injection, and by SGI, because they depended on the
> MIPS architecture.

> On the other hand, though, all other workstation developers, in fierce
> competition with SGI, didn't want /that/ dependency and went to look
> for/make other architectures (Power, Alpha, PA, you name it).

> So on the one hand, we might have, these days, been running on MIPS;
> on that other hand, we wouldn't have ARM, and -- who knows, soon,
> Risc-V. And Linus Torvalds wouldn't have had this cool stint at
> Transmeta. But that is a totally different kettle of fish. 

Another rumor I read was that IBM, when developing the first IBM PC in
1980, opted to use the 8086/8088 CPU instead of the also availble M68k
CPU because the Intel one was less powerful so it would not be in
competition with the mainframes the PC was supposed to interface with
primarily.

If this rumor is true and IBM had acted differently, the PC ecosystem
today would also look quite differently.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.

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