Interesting..Thurrott says no 128 bit Windows 8

Posted in Uncategorized by

Interesting little snippet I saw on the internets today.

I was reading through the  WinInfo Short Takes: Week of November 16 and I saw something very interesting.

It was this quote..

Microsoft confirmed this week that it is already well into the planning and preparation stages for Windows 8, but that was a given. Another given: You can forget all about that 128-bit architecture baloney. That simply isn’t true, despite the fact that I still see reports being written about it.

Interesting news to me especially since all the blogs (including mine) have been discussing the possibility of a 128 bit version of Windows 8.

What do you guys think? 128 bit gonna happen or not?

Tags:,,

Related Posts

About Author

Onuora Amobi is the Founder and VP of Digital Marketing at Learn About The Web Inc. Onuora has more than a decade of information security, project management and management consulting experience. He has specialized in the management and deployment of large scale ERP client/server systems. In addition to being a former Microsoft MVP and the founder and editor of EyeOnWindows.com, he is the CEO of a Pasadena based online marketing education startup - Learn About The Web Inc. (www.learnabouttheweb.com).

  • Phillip Fasan

    I think it’s way too early for anyone to rule out 128 bit versions of Windows.

    No matter how connected they are

  • Paul Rubinio

    Thurrott says no 128 bit version of Windows 8

    http://tinyurl.com/ygumbsw

  • Tricky

    There’s no point in 128bit CPUs except for very obscure research where 64bit CPUs would do fine anyway. Why would Microsoft bother spending their resources developing Windows 8 to support 128bit?

  • buang

    interesting, with 64bit CPU and 64bit architecture OS, many people still got problem, so how can we use 128bit CPU and 128bit OS. because i think many people out there is still use x86bit OS for their PC. but if it’s true, maybe we can ask our self, are it necessary to us to use it, cause i have read in some magazine, many people don’t know the meaning of x86, x64, or maybe x128bit. and not all people needed for their daily computation. even some argue tells us about the advantage for performance and security. but i thought it could be useful for scientific implementations

  • Philip

    @ Mr. fasan and Buang. Have to agree. I’m sure if MS decided to include 128bit, it will be merely for bragging rights. It would be nice but still, all the same, it would be a long while before any app developers would take advantage of that. Hardware wise, I think we’ll see challenges of creating 128bit cpu’s in regards to heat dissipation solutions for these CPU’s. Ultimately, I think the ceiling of Moore’s Law will be in clearer view and traditional lithography manufacturing will have to give way to a more advanced technology. Quantum computing maybe?

  • Keystone De Kript

    I think they need to stop selling 32bit and 64bit processors altogether.
    The architectures are too buggy, one thing that needs to change is the way the processors deal with the stack. It bugs me that they did not separate the stack into a call stack and a data stack with the last architecture change. In my mind that’s not a mistake that’s pure stupidity.

    I still use a 32 bit processor environment because with 64 bits there is no performance or security increase over the last unless you buy a totally different OS and even then the increase is not really noticeable unless your using enormous numbers (ASLR does utilize the extra address space which is a start). In fact I program in assembler and I have never needed anything bigger than a dword.

  • FiftyOne

    “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”