“Microsoft is playing wait-and-see with AMD’s 64-bit Opteron processor. The company has no definite commitment to ship a version of its .Net Server operating system for the new processor, though both will be available at the same time, around April of 2003. The stance was laid out at Microsoft’s IT Forum event in Copenhagen on Thursday by Microsoft’s Windows supremo.” Read the report at ZDNet.UK. AMD does have samples of Windows 64bit for their new processors though.
Microsoft Teases AMD Over 64bit .Net Server
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
While Microsoft support is nice, for this chip – which at first will be mainly aimed at servers I believe? – it isn’t a prerequisite.
If the big Linux vendors weren’t supporting it, then I’d be worried.
>which at first will be mainly aimed at servers I believe?
No, Athlon64 (previously called ClawHammer) is intended for the desktop, while Opteron (the big brother of Clawhammer) is for servers. So AMD needs a Windows 64 version to show off their new CPUs.
…AMD has enjoyed trying to get into bed with Microsoft. Unless the media has been playing things up, it appears that MS constantly snubs AMD. I remember the article about how AMD sponsored MS going to some conference and how MS demoed their product on an Itanium.
If MS really snubs AMD for good, then it _really_ opens the way for Apple… Even if you think of it zealotry-wise the Apple fans wouldn’t be as pissed off from a possible move of Apple to Athlon64/Opteron, because in the meantime the AMD fanboys (as TomsHardware calls them
will already be pissed off at Microsoft and Intel because of the non-release of a Windows64, so that really opens the way for Apple and AMD getting together and the two user communities could do well too.
“If MS really snubs AMD for good, then it _really_ opens the way for Apple”
Well that of course would mean Apple going X86 which they have always seemed hostile about, even if there are secret x86 build out there. Also the Linux server market is about 10 times the size of Apple in the server market so I would think this would benefit them the most since they wouldn’t even be competing with windows or any other unixs. But It wouldn’t be a bad thing to have Apple trying to compete with linux on AMD 64.
I do have to say I would love to see Apple on an X86 compatiblte platform. Of course they would still rule with an iron fist and use the same tactics they use now of using proprietary bits to ensure you can’t use any third party hardware that they don’t approve, but at least its a step in the right direction.
I look forward to the day that I’ll be able to use reasonably priced hardware and build my own Mac with whatever parts I want. I know that won’t ever happen, but I can dream can’t I?
….I know that won’t ever happen, but I can dream can’t I?
Yes you area allowed to dream – So long as it is not in violation of the DMCA.
http://www.linuxgames.com/news/feedback.php?identiferID=6013
Even if 100% of Linux users opt for AMD, that won’t save them. Linux desktops+servers represent about 1% of all x86-based desktops+servers. Windows is about 98%.
In addition to this, not 100% Linux users would buy an AMD CPU, many will rather get an Itanium.
So, if MS screws AMD (and we know that whoever got in bed with MS got screwed), that’s it for them. AMD will survive mostly thanks to their flash memory, but as a very much reduced company.
Unless:
– Apple makes a special agreement with AMD to be an exclusive user of the opteron, and starts selling Opteron-based Macs, at the traditionally high Apple price. I’m saying this because I believe Apple wouldn’t survive by selling the Opteron-ported OS X.
And, to a much lesser extent:
– Sun has always been nonplussed about the Itanium, which was a source of tensions between Sun and Intel. Sun could port Solaris x86 and Solaris Linux to the opteron, or at least _not_ port them to the Itanium: IA-32 code is dog slow on the Itanium, so these OS-es would be practicly unusable on that CPU. And Sun could then start producing the LX50-kind of appliances with the Opteron.
IBM might do something similar. HPaq will not, they are 100% committed to the Itanium, since they jointly developed it with Intel. The other CPU HP is developing and developing for is the PA RISC (which, btw, I really hope they don’t jettison, because it’s good and there’s a ton of software for it, unlke the Itanium).
That (see my link) is not only good for Linux users switching to 64-bit Linux, but also for gamers switching from Windows to 64bit with Linux and AMD.
I think that Linux is set to rule the 64-bit servers not Windows, irrespective of the Intel-HPag-MS stance. Win64 is going to be so buggy and disfunctional compared to Linux64 that in the beginning nobody will touch it. AMD has a chance no matter what MS says.
“Linux desktops+servers represent about 1% of all x86-based desktops+servers. Windows is about 98%.”
You got your facts wrong there. Linux desktop may only account for 1-3%, but Linux servers account for 25% of the server market.
I agree with you that Linux took a quarter, I believe even more than a quarter, of the Intel server space. It’s just that Intel servers vs Intel workstations is about 1:50