Ezekiel wrote:
< snip >
> It is a undisputable *FACT* that there were 64-bit Unix OS's in use well
> over a decade before the first 64-bit Linux. So it is a complete lie to
> post that "Linux is ahead of *Everyone*" at 64-bit computing.
No, it is not. Those 64bit Unix ran on *mainframes*
There simply were no 64bit machines around except mainframes
The superminis which later appeared with 64bits had (at that time)
basically the same computing power than the mainframes before.
Linux was the first to have 64bit on PC-class hardware
For example for the AMD64 instruction set it had it some month *before* the
first chip left the fab, years before MS offered the first XP64 for it
(which then additionally had severe problems which partially exist to this
day). I guess that Roy thinks of these chips when talking about 64bit
computing, as in PC-class machines you basically get nothing else
And on these chips (be it Intel or AMD) linux were the first by a wide
margin.
Although it wasn't the first 64bit linux. That is several years older
> Just
> because you want to give Roy a 'free pass' and dismiss it as "but we all
> know" doesn't change the fact that the headline is completely dishonest
> and misleading.
And just because you want to dismiss it as lies and damned lies you don't
get to leave out the pertinent bits
--
The liar Michael Glasser (Snot/Snit/Rekruled/Brock McNuggets/Rhino Plastee)
Like being presumed a thief and a liar before using a product?
If so, use M$ XP
|
|
